| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 27 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 40:26:06 |
| Calls: | 631 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 1,187 |
| D/L today: |
24 files (29,813K bytes) |
| Messages: | 174,392 |
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did >doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in it, from
discussion, but I've never watched the whole first serial.
Maybe I should.
----
Trustworthy words are not pretty;
Pretty words are not trustworthy.
-Lao-Tzu spoke those pretty words.
In article <MPG.433b43fbe32af8bf989990@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did >doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in it, from >discussion, but I've never watched the whole first serial.
Maybe I should.
Tubi has it last I checked.
Verily, in article <10ast4b$1uri$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did >doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article <MPG.433b43fbe32af8bf989990@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in it, from
discussion, but I've never watched the whole first serial.
Maybe I should.
Tubi has it last I checked.
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know. It has all the >Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
----
Trustworthy words are not pretty;
Pretty words are not trustworthy.
-Lao-Tzu spoke those pretty words.
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in
it, from discussion, but I've never watched the whole
first serial.
Maybe I should.
Verily, in article <10ast4b$1uri$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article
<MPG.433b43fbe32af8bf989990@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in it,
from discussion, but I've never watched the whole first
serial.
Maybe I should.
Tubi has it last I checked.
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know. It has
all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in
it, from discussion, but I've never watched the whole
first serial.
Maybe I should.
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in its
concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we all
know and love... and it introduced us to a character who would
go on to become one of the most iconic figures in British
television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic, yet it's
effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become about. Which
in turn evolved into the modern era of the show... which could
almost be a different show.
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some stage...
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in
it, from discussion, but I've never watched the whole
first serial.
Maybe I should.
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in its
concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we all
know and love... and it introduced us to a character who would
go on to become one of the most iconic figures in British
television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic, yet it's
effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become about. Which
in turn evolved into the modern era of the show... which could
almost be a different show.
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some stage...
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10ast4b$1uri$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article
<MPG.433b43fbe32af8bf989990@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in it,
from discussion, but I've never watched the whole first
serial.
Maybe I should.
Tubi has it last I checked.
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know. It has
all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as well as
the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
Verily, in article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>, did >blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in
it, from discussion, but I've never watched the whole
first serial.
Maybe I should.
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in its
concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we all
know and love... and it introduced us to a character who would
go on to become one of the most iconic figures in British
television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic, yet it's
effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become about. Which
in turn evolved into the modern era of the show... which could
almost be a different show.
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some stage...
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also been scrubbed >pretty well, though I'll look further.
----
Trustworthy words are not pretty;
Pretty words are not trustworthy.
-Lao-Tzu spoke those pretty words.
Verily, in article
<xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in
it, from discussion, but I've never watched the whole
first serial.
Maybe I should.
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in
its concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we
all know and love... and it introduced us to a character who
would go on to become one of the most iconic figures in
British television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic,
yet it's effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become
about. Which in turn evolved into the modern era of the
show... which could almost be a different show.
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some stage...
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also been
scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
In article
<MPG.433cb46642b4dd649899a1@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article
<xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some
stage...
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also
been scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
Huh??!!
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
In article <xn0pb4zig2j0pcx003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know.
It has all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as
well as the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
That is what she said.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article
<xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in
it, from discussion, but I've never watched the whole
first serial.
Maybe I should.
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in
its concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we
all know and love... and it introduced us to a character who
would go on to become one of the most iconic figures in
British television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic,
yet it's effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become
about. Which in turn evolved into the modern era of the
show... which could almost be a different show.
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some stage...
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also been
scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
There are rights issues surrounding "An Unearthly Child" so that
might be the reason it's not on Tubi... it was taken off the BBC
iPlayer a couple of years ago because the BBC does not own the
entire copyright. So it probably affects every service that has
deals with the BBC.
That's why having physical releases of stories is still a good
idea. Rights issues can go f*k themselves then!
The Doctor wrote:
In article
<MPG.433cb46642b4dd649899a1@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article
<xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some
stage...
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also
been scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
Huh??!!
Speak to Stef Coburn... he's looking for compensation from
the BBC for the work his father did on those episodes back
in 1963.
Stef Coburn had some choice words about modern "Doctor Who"
too... especially the casting of Ncuti Gatwa! So it's likely
he won't be agreeing much with the BBC any time soon.
I don't care, I have the DVD... ;-)
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Verily, in article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>, did >blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
Agreed. Ten years is the usual cutoff.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Yep.
----
Trustworthy words are not pretty;
Pretty words are not trustworthy.
-Lao-Tzu spoke those pretty words.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zig2j0pcx003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know.
It has all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as
well as the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
That is what she said.
WHOOSH!
In article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Melissa what information do you have?
In article <MPG.433d96e654dee5689899a9@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>, did >blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
Agreed. Ten years is the usual cutoff.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Yep.
Including the patronising of 2 teachers forcing their way into the TARDIS?
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in
it, from discussion, but I've never watched the whole
first serial.
Maybe I should.
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in its
concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we all
know and love... and it introduced us to a character who would
go on to become one of the most iconic figures in British
television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic, yet it's
effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become about. Which
in turn evolved into the modern era of the show... which could
almost be a different show.
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some stage...
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article
<xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in
it, from discussion, but I've never watched the whole
first serial.
Maybe I should.
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in
its concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we
all know and love... and it introduced us to a character who
would go on to become one of the most iconic figures in
British television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic,
yet it's effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become
about. Which in turn evolved into the modern era of the
show... which could almost be a different show.
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some stage...
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also been
scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
There are rights issues surrounding "An Unearthly Child" so that
might be the reason it's not on Tubi... it was taken off the BBC
iPlayer a couple of years ago because the BBC does not own the
entire copyright. So it probably affects every service that has
deals with the BBC.
That's why having physical releases of stories is still a good
idea. Rights issues can go fuck themselves then!
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10ast4b$1uri$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article
<MPG.433b43fbe32af8bf989990@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in it,
from discussion, but I've never watched the whole first
serial.
Maybe I should.
Tubi has it last I checked.
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know. It has
all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as well as
the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
Verily, in article <10b0tdk$1nd1$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did >doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Melissa what information do you have?
I don't care about spoilers. I appreciate the consideration, but I
already know the characters and plot, so I doubt you could ruin anything
for me.
Please, just post anything you like about something broadcast so long
ago.
----
Trustworthy words are not pretty;
Pretty words are not trustworthy.
-Lao-Tzu spoke those pretty words.
Verily, in article <10b0teo$1nd1$5@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did >doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article <MPG.433d96e654dee5689899a9@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
Agreed. Ten years is the usual cutoff.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Yep.
Including the patronising of 2 teachers forcing their way into the TARDIS?
Yes, I know Ian and Barbara are teachers who barged into the TARDIS
because they had nosy concerns about Susan, and I know that One was >frequently condescending. I already know the story and characters.
If you want to post thoughts on An Unearthly Child, go right ahead.
----
Trustworthy words are not pretty;
Pretty words are not trustworthy.
-Lao-Tzu spoke those pretty words.
On 22/09/2025 15:50, The Doctor wrote:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
Have the BBC put it back on iPlayer?
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 23/09/2025 15:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10ast4b$1uri$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article
<MPG.433b43fbe32af8bf989990@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <10arnn6$3co$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
You know, I never have. I know most of what happens in it,
from discussion, but I've never watched the whole first
serial.
Maybe I should.
Tubi has it last I checked.
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know. It has
all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as well as
the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
Are you saying the McCoy is not part of the classic era?
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 23/09/2025 15:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know.
It has all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as
well as the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
Are you saying the McCoy is not part of the classic era?
On 24/09/2025 14:13, Blueshirt wrote:
There are rights issues surrounding "An Unearthly Child" so
that might be the reason it's not on Tubi... it was taken
off the BBC iPlayer a couple of years ago because the BBC
does not own the
It was never on iPlayer when they put everything else up in
2023.
Last year Terror of the Zygons and the Seeds of Doom
both joined it.
That's why having physical releases of stories is still a
good idea. Rights issues can go fuck themselves then!
I've already paid for An Unearthly Child and everything
else the BBC has made many times over.
I own it and so do all Licence fee payers.
On 22/09/2025 15:50, The Doctor wrote:
Hello Melissa, have you seen an Unearthly Child
and what are your impressions?
Have the BBC put it back on iPlayer?
On 23/09/2025 15:28, Blueshirt wrote:
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in
its concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we
all know and love... and it introduced us to a character who
would go on to become one of the most iconic figures in
British television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic,
yet it's effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become
about. Which in turn evolved into the modern era of the
show... which could almost be a different show.
Was that whole paragraph written by AI?
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
I can't remember if I recorded it when it was last broadcast
during the 50th anniversary, or even if it was broadcast. I
don't even know which hard drive it might be on or if I burned
it to DVD.
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid for with
my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
Verily, in article <10b0teo$1nd1$5@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
If you want to post thoughts on An Unearthly Child, go
right ahead.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 23/09/2025 15:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know.
It has all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as
well as the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
Are you saying the McCoy is not part of the classic era?
<face palm>
What is wrong with everyone here lately? Have they had a humour
bypass or something.
I think I need a holiday...
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10b0teo$1nd1$5@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
If you want to post thoughts on An Unearthly Child, go
right ahead.
This should be interesting...
The True Doctor wrote:
On 23/09/2025 15:30, Blueshirt wrote:
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as
well as the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
Are you saying the McCoy is not part of the classic era?
<face palm>
What is wrong with everyone here lately? Have they had a humour
bypass or something.
I think I need a holiday...
Verily, in article <xn0pb6gm241u7hy000@post.eweka.nl>, did >blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 23/09/2025 15:30, Blueshirt wrote:
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as
well as the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
Are you saying the McCoy is not part of the classic era?
<face palm>
What is wrong with everyone here lately? Have they had a humour
bypass or something.
I think I need a holiday...
I started feeling sorry for you after the second one. :)
Don't worry; I understood you.
----
Trustworthy words are not pretty;
Pretty words are not trustworthy.
-Lao-Tzu spoke those pretty words.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zig2j0pcx003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know.
It has all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as
well as the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
That is what she said.
WHOOSH!
On 24/09/2025 11:30 pm, Blueshirt wrote:^^^^^<-PAedophile talker noted
The Doctor wrote:Yes, cause I very much doubt that Binky has ever heard Melissa say
In article <xn0pb4zig2j0pcx003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Yeah, it has the entire classic show as far as I know.
It has all the Doctors from One to Seven, at least.
In other words, it has the classic era of the show... as
well as the Sylvester McCoy era!
;-)
That is what she said.
WHOOSH!
anything .... EVERY!!
And he has not caught on to your not considering that Sylvester AS >ClassicWho!!
----
Daniel70
On 24/09/2025 14:13, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also been
scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
There are rights issues surrounding "An Unearthly Child" so that
might be the reason it's not on Tubi... it was taken off the BBC
iPlayer a couple of years ago because the BBC does not own the
It was never on iPlayer when they put everything else up in 2023. Last
year Terror of the Zygons and the Seeds of Doom both joined it.
entire copyright. So it probably affects every service that has
deals with the BBC.
That's why having physical releases of stories is still a good
idea. Rights issues can go fuck themselves then!
This is why torrents are a good thing which should be encouraged.
Remember that it is not illegal to download copyrighted content. If you
were never going to pay for it then you are not depriving the copyright holder of any money, greedy scum that they are. I've already paid for An Unearthly Child and everything else the BBC has made many times over. I
own it and so do all Licence fee payers.
The Doctor wrote:
In article
<MPG.433cb46642b4dd649899a1@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article
<xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some
stage...
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also
been scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
Huh??!!
Speak to Stef Coburn... he's looking for compensation from
the BBC for the work his father did on those episodes back
in 1963.
Stef Coburn had some choice words about modern "Doctor Who"
too... especially the casting of Ncuti Gatwa! So it's likely
he won't be agreeing much with the BBC any time soon.
I don't care, I have the DVD... ;-)
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10b0teo$1nd1$5@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
If you want to post thoughts on An Unearthly Child, go
right ahead.
This should be interesting...
Verily, in article <10b0tdk$1nd1$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Melissa what information do you have?
I don't care about spoilers. I appreciate the consideration, but I
already know the characters and plot, so I doubt you could ruin anything
for me.
Please, just post anything you like about something broadcast so long
ago.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 23/09/2025 15:28, Blueshirt wrote:
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in
its concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we
all know and love... and it introduced us to a character who
would go on to become one of the most iconic figures in
British television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic,
yet it's effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become
about. Which in turn evolved into the modern era of the
show... which could almost be a different show.
Was that whole paragraph written by AI?
Crikey! (The answer is no though.)
Ask Quillbot or ZeroGPT...
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
I can't remember if I recorded it when it was last broadcast
during the 50th anniversary, or even if it was broadcast. I
don't even know which hard drive it might be on or if I burned
it to DVD.
A "Doctor Who" fan who doesn't make a list of the contents of
his hard drives, or put his television show archive onto an
Excel spreadsheet? Wow! How disorganised you are.
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid for with
my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
No, because the BBC don't own the copyright to that story in its
entirety...
On 25/09/2025 12:16 am, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10b0tdk$1nd1$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, didOh!! Melissa, you spoil-sport, you!!
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Melissa what information do you have?
I don't care about spoilers. I appreciate the consideration, but I
already know the characters and plot, so I doubt you could ruin anything
for me.
Please, just post anything you like about something broadcast so long
ago.
Binky was wanting you to post that you knew nothing what so ever about
the 'Doctor Who' episode "An Unearthly Child" because then Binky could
hide behind not wanting to spoil things for you. ;-P
Then he wouldn't have to embarrass himself with how little he does
actually know.
On 25/09/2025 12:42 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 24/09/2025 14:13, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
<Snip>
.... so, it could be argued, that your downloading it from Tubi/wherever *IS* legal ..... but I, for one, have NEVER paid for it (Beta/VHS/DVD)I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also been
scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
There are rights issues surrounding "An Unearthly Child" so that
might be the reason it's not on Tubi... it was taken off the BBC
iPlayer a couple of years ago because the BBC does not own the
It was never on iPlayer when they put everything else up in 2023. Last
year Terror of the Zygons and the Seeds of Doom both joined it.
entire copyright. So it probably affects every service that has
deals with the BBC.
That's why having physical releases of stories is still a good
idea. Rights issues can go fuck themselves then!
This is why torrents are a good thing which should be encouraged.
Remember that it is not illegal to download copyrighted content. If
you were never going to pay for it then you are not depriving the
copyright holder of any money, greedy scum that they are. I've already
paid for An Unearthly Child and everything else the BBC has made many
times over. I own it and so do all Licence fee payers.
so my downloading it SHOULD be illegal!!
On 25/09/2025 2:30 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:And I would have thought there would be a "Fair Wear and Tare" element
On 23/09/2025 15:28, Blueshirt wrote:
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in
its concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we
all know and love... and it introduced us to a character who
would go on to become one of the most iconic figures in
British television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic,
yet it's effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become
about. Which in turn evolved into the modern era of the
show... which could almost be a different show.
Was that whole paragraph written by AI?
Crikey! (The answer is no though.)
Ask Quillbot or ZeroGPT...
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
I can't remember if I recorded it when it was last broadcast
during the 50th anniversary, or even if it was broadcast. I
don't even know which hard drive it might be on or if I burned
it to DVD.
A "Doctor Who" fan who doesn't make a list of the contents of
his hard drives, or put his television show archive onto an
Excel spreadsheet? Wow! How disorganised you are.
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid for with
my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
No, because the BBC don't own the copyright to that story in its
entirety...
on tape-wear in there as well.
In article <xn0pb6hcg42wdak004@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
If you want to post thoughts on An Unearthly Child, go
right ahead.
This should be interesting...
Check new thread.
And he has not caught on to your not considering
that Sylvester AS ClassicWho!!
On 25/09/2025 2:30 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid
for with my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
No, because the BBC don't own the copyright to that story
in its entirety...
And I would have thought there would be a "Fair Wear and Tare"
element on tape-wear in there as well.
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Maybe I should send an entitled e-mail to Parlophone?
Daniel70 wrote:
On 25/09/2025 2:30 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:And I would have thought there would be a "Fair Wear and Tare"
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid
for with my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
No, because the BBC don't own the copyright to that story
in its entirety...
element on tape-wear in there as well.
The BBC wouldn't be replacing anybodies VHS tapes anyway...
that's not their job.
Plus, they have provided every episode of "Doctor Who", that
they are able to, on their streaming service for licence fee
payers in the UK. It's not their fault if a rights holder
refuses them permission to make certain episodes available.
On 25/09/2025 12:42 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 24/09/2025 14:13, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
<Snip>
.... so, it could be argued, that your downloading it from Tubi/wherever >*IS* legal ..... but I, for one, have NEVER paid for it (Beta/VHS/DVD)I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also been
scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
There are rights issues surrounding "An Unearthly Child" so that
might be the reason it's not on Tubi... it was taken off the BBC
iPlayer a couple of years ago because the BBC does not own the
It was never on iPlayer when they put everything else up in 2023. Last
year Terror of the Zygons and the Seeds of Doom both joined it.
entire copyright. So it probably affects every service that has
deals with the BBC.
That's why having physical releases of stories is still a good
idea. Rights issues can go fuck themselves then!
This is why torrents are a good thing which should be encouraged.
Remember that it is not illegal to download copyrighted content. If you
were never going to pay for it then you are not depriving the copyright
holder of any money, greedy scum that they are. I've already paid for An
Unearthly Child and everything else the BBC has made many times over. I
own it and so do all Licence fee payers.
so my downloading it SHOULD be illegal!!
--
Daniel70
On 24/09/2025 11:20 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:Selfish thinking of you, Blueshirt!! ;-P
In article
<MPG.433cb46642b4dd649899a1@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article
<xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so it's
definitely something that a fan should watch at some
stage...
I tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also
been scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
Huh??!!
Speak to Stef Coburn... he's looking for compensation from
the BBC for the work his father did on those episodes back
in 1963.
Stef Coburn had some choice words about modern "Doctor Who"
too... especially the casting of Ncuti Gatwa! So it's likely
he won't be agreeing much with the BBC any time soon.
I don't care, I have the DVD... ;-)
----
Daniel70
On 25/09/2025 12:16 am, The True Melissa wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
Verily, in article <10b0tdk$1nd1$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, didOh!! Melissa, you spoil-sport, you!!
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Melissa what information do you have?
I don't care about spoilers. I appreciate the consideration, but I
already know the characters and plot, so I doubt you could ruin anything
for me.
Please, just post anything you like about something broadcast so long
ago.
Binky was wanting you to post that you knew nothing what so ever about
the 'Doctor Who' episode "An Unearthly Child" because then Binky could^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
hide behind not wanting to spoil things for you. ;-P--
Then he wouldn't have to embarrass himself with how little he does
actually know.
--
Daniel70
On 25/09/2025 10:37 pm, Daniel70 wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
On 25/09/2025 12:16 am, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <10b0tdk$1nd1$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, didOh!! Melissa, you spoil-sport, you!!
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article <xn0pb6cgp3w9jas003@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb4zet2ivff9002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
And some of my opinions might be spoilers.
Post them anyway... the story was broadcast in 1963.
It's rare that you have opinions about "Doctor Who" episodes,
bar your usual one-line sound bites, so don't spoil our
enjoyment by not posting them when you do have them!
I'm sure Melissa knows the basics of the story anyway...
Melissa what information do you have?
I don't care about spoilers. I appreciate the consideration, but I
already know the characters and plot, so I doubt you could ruin anything >>> for me.
Please, just post anything you like about something broadcast so long
ago.
Binky was wanting you to post that you knew nothing what so ever about
the 'Doctor Who' episode "An Unearthly Child" because then Binky could
hide behind not wanting to spoil things for you. ;-P
Then he wouldn't have to embarrass himself with how little he does
actually know.
.... and I note that Binky DID post a review of "An Unearthly Child" Part 1.
----
Daniel70
On 25/09/2025 13:26, Daniel70 wrote:
On 25/09/2025 12:42 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 24/09/2025 14:13, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
<Snip>
.... so, it could be argued, that your downloading it from Tubi/whereverI tried, but turns out it's not on Tubi. YouTube has also been
scrubbed pretty well, though I'll look further.
There are rights issues surrounding "An Unearthly Child" so that
might be the reason it's not on Tubi... it was taken off the BBC
iPlayer a couple of years ago because the BBC does not own the
It was never on iPlayer when they put everything else up in 2023. Last
year Terror of the Zygons and the Seeds of Doom both joined it.
entire copyright. So it probably affects every service that has
deals with the BBC.
That's why having physical releases of stories is still a good
idea. Rights issues can go fuck themselves then!
This is why torrents are a good thing which should be encouraged.
Remember that it is not illegal to download copyrighted content. If
you were never going to pay for it then you are not depriving the
copyright holder of any money, greedy scum that they are. I've already
paid for An Unearthly Child and everything else the BBC has made many
times over. I own it and so do all Licence fee payers.
*IS* legal ..... but I, for one, have NEVER paid for it (Beta/VHS/DVD)
so my downloading it SHOULD be illegal!!
Not if you were never going to pay for it. The copyright holder would
have to prove that you have deprived them of revenue. If you downloaded
it without paying for it and then sold it then you would be violating >copyright. If you gave it away to someone who was never going to pay for
it you wouldn't. If you bought it legally and sold it to someone else
you would not be violating copyright either. If you bought it legally,
made multiple copies of it and gave it away for free to others who were >never going to pay for it, there's no copyright violation. If you bought
it legally and screened it to your friends in your home and charged them
to watch it there's no copyright violation. If you bought it legally and >broadcast it so anyone could watch it you would be violating copyright
since anyone can watch it including those who would have paid for it if
they didn't already own it, assuming of course people watched it. If
they didn't watch it there's no copyright violation. If you bought it >legally, made a copy of it and broadcast the copy, apparently that's >copyright violation even if broadcasting the original source would be
legal. It's like paying a plumber to install some pipes and then
replacing one of the pipes that sprang a leak yourself and then having
to pay the original plumber again for work he never did for work that
either you or a different plumber carried out. Time for copyright to be >abolished I think.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 25/09/2025 2:34 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:Wait!! Wait!!
Verily, in article <10b0teo$1nd1$5@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
If you want to post thoughts on An Unearthly Child, go
right ahead.
This should be interesting...
----
Daniel70
On 25/09/2025 2:30 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:And I would have thought there would be a "Fair Wear and Tare" element
On 23/09/2025 15:28, Blueshirt wrote:
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in
its concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we
all know and love... and it introduced us to a character who
would go on to become one of the most iconic figures in
British television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic,
yet it's effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become
about. Which in turn evolved into the modern era of the
show... which could almost be a different show.
Was that whole paragraph written by AI?
Crikey! (The answer is no though.)
Ask Quillbot or ZeroGPT...
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
I can't remember if I recorded it when it was last broadcast
during the 50th anniversary, or even if it was broadcast. I
don't even know which hard drive it might be on or if I burned
it to DVD.
A "Doctor Who" fan who doesn't make a list of the contents of
his hard drives, or put his television show archive onto an
Excel spreadsheet? Wow! How disorganised you are.
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid for with
my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
No, because the BBC don't own the copyright to that story in its
entirety...
on tape-wear in there as well.
----
Daniel70
On 25/09/2025 13:43, Daniel70 wrote:
On 25/09/2025 2:30 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:And I would have thought there would be a "Fair Wear and Tare" element
On 23/09/2025 15:28, Blueshirt wrote:
You should, that first story in 1963 was ground breaking in
its concepts, setting up the structure of the series that we
all know and love... and it introduced us to a character who
would go on to become one of the most iconic figures in
British television history. "An Unearthly Child" is basic,
yet it's effective in showing what "Doctor Who" would become
about. Which in turn evolved into the modern era of the
show... which could almost be a different show.
Was that whole paragraph written by AI?
Crikey! (The answer is no though.)
Ask Quillbot or ZeroGPT...
But, "An Unearthly Child" is where it all started, so
it's definitely something that a fan should watch at
some stage...
I can't remember if I recorded it when it was last broadcast
during the 50th anniversary, or even if it was broadcast. I
don't even know which hard drive it might be on or if I burned
it to DVD.
A "Doctor Who" fan who doesn't make a list of the contents of
his hard drives, or put his television show archive onto an
Excel spreadsheet? Wow! How disorganised you are.
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid for with
my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
No, because the BBC don't own the copyright to that story in its
entirety...
on tape-wear in there as well.
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just the original
pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I have no idea now which tape
it's on, or even if I can play it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS
tapes decades ago when DVD came out. I am still owed DVD copies by the
BBC of the Doctor Who tapes I legally bought.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb6hcg42wdak004@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
If you want to post thoughts on An Unearthly Child, go
right ahead.
This should be interesting...
Check new thread.
I did, and all I saw was a poorly written review of episode
one... HOWEVER, at least you tried, so well done. <claps>
Why couldn't you have contributed something similar when
Melissa was doing the "Watch Party"? It died a death because
people didn't join in, or contribute their thoughts.
Daniel70 wrote:
And he has not caught on to your not considering
that Sylvester AS ClassicWho!!
Joking apart, it's not a classic era of the show.
The Sylvester McCoy era of "Doctor Who" was nothing
but a pantomime... and it was so bad it got the show
cancelled.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 25/09/2025 2:30 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:And I would have thought there would be a "Fair Wear and Tare"
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid
for with my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
No, because the BBC don't own the copyright to that story
in its entirety...
element on tape-wear in there as well.
The BBC wouldn't be replacing anybodies VHS tapes anyway...
that's not their job.
Plus, they have provided every episode of "Doctor Who", that
they are able to, on their streaming service for licence fee
payers in the UK. It's not their fault if a rights holder
refuses them permission to make certain episodes available.
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Maybe I should send an entitled e-mail to Parlophone?
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I have >already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is obliged
to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost price.
They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to them.
Maybe I should send an entitled e-mail to Parlophone?
Parlophone or whoever owns Apple Records now which I think is Universal >Music through Capitol Records or some other label. Parlophone was sold
to Warner without the Beatles catalogue being included.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 25/09/2025 20:32, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 25/09/2025 2:30 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:And I would have thought there would be a "Fair Wear and Tare"
Can the BBC replace my legitimate copy which I paid
for with my TV licence by putting it back on iPlayer?
No, because the BBC don't own the copyright to that story
in its entirety...
element on tape-wear in there as well.
The BBC wouldn't be replacing anybodies VHS tapes anyway...
that's not their job.
Plus, they have provided every episode of "Doctor Who", that
they are able to, on their streaming service for licence fee
payers in the UK. It's not their fault if a rights holder
refuses them permission to make certain episodes available.
Like the very first ever episode? What is the use of watching the stuff
on iPlayer without that or Terror of the Zygons and The Seeds of Doom?
Without Terror of the Zygons the cliffhanger at the end of Revenge of
the Cybermen remains unexplained.
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An Unearthly Child
how can their claim the don't have the rights to it, or is that missing
from The Daleks as well?
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor
Who tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a
free DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes
shipping. I have already paid for the right to watch the
recording so the BBC is obliged to send me the DVD at cost
price instead of making me pay twice.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at
cost price. They should not make you pay again for the right
to listen to them.
Maybe I should send an entitled e-mail to Parlophone?
Parlophone or whoever owns Apple Records now which I think is
Universal Music through Capitol Records or some other label.
Parlophone was sold to Warner without the Beatles catalogue
being included.
On 25/09/2025 20:32, Blueshirt wrote:
Plus, they have provided every episode of "Doctor Who", that
they are able to, on their streaming service for licence fee
payers in the UK. It's not their fault if a rights holder
refuses them permission to make certain episodes available.
Like the very first ever episode? What is the use of watching
the stuff on iPlayer without that or Terror of the Zygons and
The Seeds of Doom?
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An
Unearthly Child how can their claim the don't have the rights
to it, or is that missing from The Daleks as well?
In article <xn0pb80oy3ea6nc003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Why couldn't you have contributed something similar when
Melissa was doing the "Watch Party"? It died a death because
people didn't join in, or contribute their thoughts.
Or just was not interested, or the timing was wrong.
In article <xn0pb800m3db25m000@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
And he has not caught on to your not considering
that Sylvester AS ClassicWho!!
Joking apart, it's not a classic era of the show.
The Sylvester McCoy era of "Doctor Who" was nothing
but a pantomime... and it was so bad it got the show
cancelled.
Flame warfare now active.
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is obliged
to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost price.
They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to them.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:32, Blueshirt wrote:
Plus, they have provided every episode of "Doctor Who", that
they are able to, on their streaming service for licence fee
payers in the UK. It's not their fault if a rights holder
refuses them permission to make certain episodes available.
Like the very first ever episode? What is the use of watching
the stuff on iPlayer without that or Terror of the Zygons and
The Seeds of Doom?
For "An Unearthly Child", speak to Stef Coburn...
Although funnily enough, judging by his comments on the casting
of Ncuti Gatwa and Jinkx Monsoon, as well as his thoughts on the
modern day BBC, I'd say you two would get along well.
For the other two stories, I believe it's the estate of Robert
Banks Stewart that has the issue...
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An
Unearthly Child how can their claim the don't have the rights
to it, or is that missing from The Daleks as well?
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly Child" in
regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put "streaming
distribution" into the small print of the contracts back in 1963!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb80oy3ea6nc003@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Why couldn't you have contributed something similar when
Melissa was doing the "Watch Party"? It died a death because
people didn't join in, or contribute their thoughts.
Or just was not interested, or the timing was wrong.
Fair enough, I would have had an issue with finding the time
as well. Especially for the six episode stories, which don't
work well being watched back to back anyway.
Plus I'll be away for the next two weekends so I wouldn't have
been able to contribute even if Melissa's "Watch Party" had
continued. But I liked the idea of trying to get people here
engaged. RADW is our community, we should at least try and keep
it alive.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb800m3db25m000@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
And he has not caught on to your not considering
that Sylvester AS ClassicWho!!
Joking apart, it's not a classic era of the show.
The Sylvester McCoy era of "Doctor Who" was nothing
but a pantomime... and it was so bad it got the show
cancelled.
Flame warfare now active.
I haven't changed my opinion on that era of the show in 35
years, so nothing anybody can say now will make a difference.
I lived through it, it was awful. If others liked that
period of the show, good for them. Each to their own...
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I have
already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is
obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and over
and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself
one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
On 2025-09-26 6:38 a.m., Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I
have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is
obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and over
and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself
one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
I am always curious what world Aggy lives in, expecting a lifetime
upgrade for a VHS tape purchase?-a Does he expect BBC to replace his VCR with a DVD player as well?
By this "logic" HP owes me a new laptop every three years.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor
Who tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a
free DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes
shipping. I have already paid for the right to watch the
recording so the BBC is obliged to send me the DVD at cost
price instead of making me pay twice.
I will send you any "Doctor Who" DVD that I still own for -u1
and whatever the shipping is.
In fact I think I offered you one FREE a few months ago and
you never responded. (I can't remember what story we were
talking about at the time.) But yeah, -u1 each is a fair price
for something that's currently just sitting in a plastic box on
top of a wardrobe in the spare room.
So if you want a DVD upgrade, you only have to ask.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at
cost price. They should not make you pay again for the right
to listen to them.
I think we both know how that would go if I sent them an e-mail
saying that!
Maybe I should send an entitled e-mail to Parlophone?
Parlophone or whoever owns Apple Records now which I think is
Universal Music through Capitol Records or some other label.
Parlophone was sold to Warner without the Beatles catalogue
being included.
Parlopone is the label of some of my original Beatles LP's...
these are not 2025 re-issues!!! (LiB is Apple alright.) They
are in very bad shape though, so deffo in need of an upgrade.
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I have
already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is
obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and over
and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself
one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:32, Blueshirt wrote:
Plus, they have provided every episode of "Doctor Who", that
they are able to, on their streaming service for licence fee
payers in the UK. It's not their fault if a rights holder
refuses them permission to make certain episodes available.
Like the very first ever episode? What is the use of watching
the stuff on iPlayer without that or Terror of the Zygons and
The Seeds of Doom?
For "An Unearthly Child", speak to Stef Coburn...
Although funnily enough, judging by his comments on the casting
of Ncuti Gatwa and Jinkx Monsoon, as well as his thoughts on the
modern day BBC, I'd say you two would get along well.
For the other two stories, I believe it's the estate of Robert
Banks Stewart that has the issue...
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An
Unearthly Child how can their claim the don't have the rights
to it, or is that missing from The Daleks as well?
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly Child" in
regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put "streaming
distribution" into the small print of the contracts back in 1963!
On 26/09/2025 12:04, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
Parlophone or whoever owns Apple Records now which I think
is Universal Music through Capitol Records or some other
label. Parlophone was sold to Warner without the Beatles
catalogue being included.
Parlopone is the label of some of my original Beatles LP's...
these are not 2025 re-issues!!! (LiB is Apple alright.) They
are in very bad shape though, so deffo in need of an upgrade.
If they are the originals they might be worth more than the
upgrade. Not so for Doctor Who VHS tapes.
On 26/09/2025 12:03, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An
Unearthly Child how can their claim the don't have the
rights to it, or is that missing from The Daleks as well?
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly
Child" in regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put
"streaming distribution" into the small print of the
contracts back in 1963!
Streaming, like distribution on VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray, is legally
inferred by default in the original contract unless it is
explicitly ruled out in the contract.
In article <xn0pb92c56mpm7o005@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb800m3db25m000@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Sylvester McCoy era of "Doctor Who" was nothing
but a pantomime... and it was so bad it got the show
cancelled.
Flame warfare now active.
I haven't changed my opinion on that era of the show in 35
years, so nothing anybody can say now will make a
difference. I lived through it, it was awful. If others
liked that period of the show, good for them. Each to their
own...
McCoy did not deserve the fate of Cancellation.
Whittaker and Chibnall deserve retconning.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 12:03, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An
Unearthly Child how can their claim the don't have the
rights to it, or is that missing from The Daleks as well?
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly
Child" in regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put
"streaming distribution" into the small print of the
contracts back in 1963!
Streaming, like distribution on VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray, is legally
inferred by default in the original contract unless it is
explicitly ruled out in the contract.
Methinks the BBC and its lawyers don't agree with you! Or they
wouldn't have needed the permission of Stef Coburn to put "An
Unearthly Child" up on the iPlayer... and when he didn't get
the compensation he wanted for his agreement and said no, not
put it up for streaming on their service.
If you wish to supply legal advice to the BBC on this issue,
send them an e-mail. But at a guess I don't think it's as simple
as you seem to think it is!
Clearly the people at the BBC who gave his father the contract
to sign in 1963 neglected to mention iPlayer streaming sixty
years later in the small print... so its their lack of foresight
on this issue that has caused the problem. Typical BBC eh? Shame
on them!!!
On 26/09/2025 17:31, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 12:03, Blueshirt wrote:
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly
Child" in regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put
"streaming distribution" into the small print of the
contracts back in 1963!
Streaming, like distribution on VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray, is legally
inferred by default in the original contract unless it is
explicitly ruled out in the contract.
Methinks the BBC and its lawyers don't agree with you! Or
they wouldn't have needed the permission of Stef Coburn to
put "An Unearthly Child" up on the iPlayer... and when he
didn't get the compensation he wanted for his agreement and
said no, not put it up for streaming on their service.
It it out on Blu-Ray? It seems the Tom Baker Season 13
Blu-Rays have been delayed by from June to October. Maybe the
BBC don't have permission to include Terror of the Zygons and
The Seeds of Doom on them either.
If you wish to supply legal advice to the BBC on this issue,
send them an e-mail. But at a guess I don't think it's as
simple as you seem to think it is!
It's as I explained
which is why the BBC own the rights to all of Star Trek
TOS in Europe no matter if it's broadcast on terrestrial,
satellite, or cable, or released on VHS, DVD, Blu-Ray
or as a digital download or streamed despite most of these
systems not existing at the time the BBC were sold the
rights. I don't think they were sold the novelisation rights,
but then again... And I'm not sure about the video game
rights. I don't think my Star Trek TOS DOS game ever mentions
the BBC.
Clearly the people at the BBC who gave his father the
contract to sign in 1963 neglected to mention iPlayer
streaming sixty years later in the small print... so its
their lack of foresight on this issue that has caused the
problem. Typical BBC eh? Shame on them!!!
The BBC never mentioned VHS, DVD, or Blu-Ray but they still
own the rights to those despite them probably not mentioning
Film distribution in the contract either. The Coburn estate
probably doesn't want the BBC distributing the story on any of
these formats either, or it being shown on TV.
At a guess, and it is only a guess, I imagine Paramount want all
of its Star Trek shows on its own streaming service, so as
licences expire the will leave other services one by one and end
up on Paramount+... if they have not already done so.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 17:31, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 12:03, Blueshirt wrote:
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly
Child" in regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put
"streaming distribution" into the small print of the
contracts back in 1963!
Streaming, like distribution on VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray, is legally
inferred by default in the original contract unless it is
explicitly ruled out in the contract.
Methinks the BBC and its lawyers don't agree with you! Or
they wouldn't have needed the permission of Stef Coburn to
put "An Unearthly Child" up on the iPlayer... and when he
didn't get the compensation he wanted for his agreement and
said no, not put it up for streaming on their service.
It it out on Blu-Ray? It seems the Tom Baker Season 13
Blu-Rays have been delayed by from June to October. Maybe the
BBC don't have permission to include Terror of the Zygons and
The Seeds of Doom on them either.
I have already told you it is about the STREAMING rights... this
was covered in the news reports at the time those two "Doctor
Who" stories were removed from the BBC iPlayer. It has nothing
to do with the DVD/Blu-Ray releases. So clearly in this modern
world we live in now streaming rights are a different thing
entirely and have to be re-negotiated with rights holders.
If the BBC didn't need the rights holder's permission to put
something on the iPlayer, they wouldn't ask for it! That is
logical, is it not?
If you wish to supply legal advice to the BBC on this issue,
send them an e-mail. But at a guess I don't think it's as
simple as you seem to think it is!
It's as I explained
You are wrong though. What you said might have been the case,
but things have changed in recent years. (Possibly since
Paramount launched its own streaming service.)
which is why the BBC own the rights to all of Star Trek
TOS in Europe no matter if it's broadcast on terrestrial,
satellite, or cable, or released on VHS, DVD, Blu-Ray
or as a digital download or streamed despite most of these
systems not existing at the time the BBC were sold the
rights. I don't think they were sold the novelisation rights,
but then again... And I'm not sure about the video game
rights. I don't think my Star Trek TOS DOS game ever mentions
the BBC.
The BBC can't - and don't - show Star Trek: TOS on the iPlayer.
They do not have the streaming rights for it in the UK.
It's either on Netflix or Paramount+ over there now... you can
check yourself... I've a suitcase to pack for the morning.
At a guess, and it is only a guess, I imagine Paramount want all
of its Star Trek shows on its own streaming service, so as
licences expire the will leave other services one by one and end
up on Paramount+... if they have not already done so.
Clearly the people at the BBC who gave his father the
contract to sign in 1963 neglected to mention iPlayer
streaming sixty years later in the small print... so its
their lack of foresight on this issue that has caused the
problem. Typical BBC eh? Shame on them!!!
The BBC never mentioned VHS, DVD, or Blu-Ray but they still
own the rights to those despite them probably not mentioning
Film distribution in the contract either. The Coburn estate
probably doesn't want the BBC distributing the story on any of
these formats either, or it being shown on TV.
If you'd paid attention you'd know it was it's about the
streaming rights for "An Unearthly Child" and nothing else.
(Well, nothing else except money!!!) Stef Coburn has been--
quite vocal about his objections. Google is your friend.
On 26/09/2025 10:44 pm, Idlehands wrote:
On 2025-09-26 6:38 a.m., Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:You paid your money, you got your copy.
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I
have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is
obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice. >>>
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and over
and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself
one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
I am always curious what world Aggy lives in, expecting a lifetime
upgrade for a VHS tape purchase?-a Does he expect BBC to replace his VCR
with a DVD player as well?
Now there's a point!
By this "logic" HP owes me a new laptop every three years.Me, too!! Even if I did spill coca-cola over the keyboard!!
----
Daniel70
On 26/09/2025 12:04, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor
Who tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a
free DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes
shipping. I have already paid for the right to watch the
recording so the BBC is obliged to send me the DVD at cost
price instead of making me pay twice.
I will send you any "Doctor Who" DVD that I still own for -u1
and whatever the shipping is.
In fact I think I offered you one FREE a few months ago and
you never responded. (I can't remember what story we were
talking about at the time.) But yeah, -u1 each is a fair price
for something that's currently just sitting in a plastic box on
top of a wardrobe in the spare room.
So if you want a DVD upgrade, you only have to ask.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at
cost price. They should not make you pay again for the right
to listen to them.
I think we both know how that would go if I sent them an e-mail
saying that!
If you sent them the email then you can show it in court to prove you
have not violated any copyright laws when you download backup copies,
just like I am allowed to download backup copies of the episodes of
Doctor Who that I own on VHS so I will not be needing the DVDs to fill
up yet another box on the floor.
Maybe I should send an entitled e-mail to Parlophone?
Parlophone or whoever owns Apple Records now which I think is
Universal Music through Capitol Records or some other label.
Parlophone was sold to Warner without the Beatles catalogue
being included.
Parlopone is the label of some of my original Beatles LP's...
these are not 2025 re-issues!!! (LiB is Apple alright.) They
are in very bad shape though, so deffo in need of an upgrade.
If they are the originals they might be worth more than the upgrade. Not
so for Doctor Who VHS tapes.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I have >>> already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is
obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and over
and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself
one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I have
no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything you own.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb92c56mpm7o005@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pb800m3db25m000@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Sylvester McCoy era of "Doctor Who" was nothing
but a pantomime... and it was so bad it got the show
cancelled.
Flame warfare now active.
I haven't changed my opinion on that era of the show in 35
years, so nothing anybody can say now will make a
difference. I lived through it, it was awful. If others
liked that period of the show, good for them. Each to their
own...
McCoy did not deserve the fate of Cancellation.
Personally I'd have liked to see the show continue with a
new Doctor... but the BBC had had enough and wanted to spend
the show's budget elsewhere. That's life.
Whittaker and Chibnall deserve retconning.
They both left and the show moved on... maybe try doing the same?
"Doctor Who" is a book made up of many chapters, some are
enjoyable, some are not... but it's a never ending story so
we'll see what the next chapter brings.
On 26/09/2025 17:31, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 12:03, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An
Unearthly Child how can their claim the don't have the
rights to it, or is that missing from The Daleks as well?
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly
Child" in regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put
"streaming distribution" into the small print of the
contracts back in 1963!
Streaming, like distribution on VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray, is legally
inferred by default in the original contract unless it is
explicitly ruled out in the contract.
Methinks the BBC and its lawyers don't agree with you! Or they
wouldn't have needed the permission of Stef Coburn to put "An
Unearthly Child" up on the iPlayer... and when he didn't get
the compensation he wanted for his agreement and said no, not
put it up for streaming on their service.
It it out on Blu-Ray? It seems the Tom Baker Season 13 Blu-Rays have
been delayed by from June to October. Maybe the BBC don't have
permission to include Terror of the Zygons and The Seeds of Doom on them >either.
If you wish to supply legal advice to the BBC on this issue,
send them an e-mail. But at a guess I don't think it's as simple
as you seem to think it is!
It's as I explained which is why the BBC own the rights to all of Star
Trek TOS in Europe no matter if it's broadcast on terrestrial,
satellite, or cable, or released on VHS, DVD, Blu-Ray or as a digital >download or streamed despite most of these systems not existing at the
time the BBC were sold the rights. I don't think they were sold the >novelisation rights, but then again... And I'm not sure about the video
game rights. I don't think my Star Trek TOS DOS game ever mentions the BBC.
Clearly the people at the BBC who gave his father the contract
to sign in 1963 neglected to mention iPlayer streaming sixty
years later in the small print... so its their lack of foresight
on this issue that has caused the problem. Typical BBC eh? Shame
on them!!!
The BBC never mentioned VHS, DVD, or Blu-Ray but they still own the
rights to those despite them probably not mentioning Film distribution
in the contract either. The Coburn estate probably doesn't want the BBC >distributing the story on any of these formats either, or it being shown
on TV.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
The Doctor wrote:
Whittaker and Chibnall deserve retconning.
They both left and the show moved on... maybe try doing the same?
"Doctor Who" is a book made up of many chapters, some are
enjoyable, some are not... but it's a never ending story so
we'll see what the next chapter brings.
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I
have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is
obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and over
and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself
one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I have
no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything you own.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 12:03, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An
Unearthly Child how can their claim the don't have the
rights to it, or is that missing from The Daleks as well?
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly
Child" in regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put
"streaming distribution" into the small print of the
contracts back in 1963!
Streaming, like distribution on VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray, is legally
inferred by default in the original contract unless it is
explicitly ruled out in the contract.
Methinks the BBC and its lawyers don't agree with you! Or they
wouldn't have needed the permission of Stef Coburn to put "An
Unearthly Child" up on the iPlayer... and when he didn't get
the compensation he wanted for his agreement and said no, not
put it up for streaming on their service.
If you wish to supply legal advice to the BBC on this issue,
send them an e-mail. But at a guess I don't think it's as simple
as you seem to think it is!
Clearly the people at the BBC who gave his father the contract
to sign in 1963 neglected to mention iPlayer streaming sixty
years later in the small print... so its their lack of foresight
on this issue that has caused the problem. Typical BBC eh? Shame
on them!!!
On 27/09/2025 2:40 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Oh!! Come on, Blueshirt. That could be The Bible that you are discussing >there!! ;-P That's Binky's territory.Whittaker and Chibnall deserve retconning.
They both left and the show moved on... maybe try doing the same?
"Doctor Who" is a book made up of many chapters, some are
enjoyable, some are not... but it's a never ending story so
we'll see what the next chapter brings.
----
Daniel70
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:You paid your money, you got your copy.
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I
have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is
obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay twice. >>>
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and over
and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself
one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I have
no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those tapes??
I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC should have
to supply surely!!
--So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything you own. >>
--
Daniel70
On 27/09/2025 2:31 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:Perhaps ..... If they had had a TARDIS back then .....!
On 26/09/2025 12:03, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
If the BBC can reprise the cliffhanger at the end of An
Unearthly Child how can their claim the don't have the
rights to it, or is that missing from The Daleks as well?
The BBC don't have the entire rights for "An Unearthly
Child" in regards to streaming, as nobody thought to put
"streaming distribution" into the small print of the
contracts back in 1963!
Streaming, like distribution on VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray, is legally
inferred by default in the original contract unless it is
explicitly ruled out in the contract.
Methinks the BBC and its lawyers don't agree with you! Or they
wouldn't have needed the permission of Stef Coburn to put "An
Unearthly Child" up on the iPlayer... and when he didn't get
the compensation he wanted for his agreement and said no, not
put it up for streaming on their service.
If you wish to supply legal advice to the BBC on this issue,
send them an e-mail. But at a guess I don't think it's as simple
as you seem to think it is!
Clearly the people at the BBC who gave his father the contract
to sign in 1963 neglected to mention iPlayer streaming sixty
years later in the small print... so its their lack of foresight
on this issue that has caused the problem. Typical BBC eh? Shame
on them!!!
----
Daniel70
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I
have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC is
obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me pay
twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and over
and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself
one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I have
no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those tapes??
I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC should have
to supply surely!!
So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything you
own.
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:<CHOP>
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I have
no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those tapes??
I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC should have
to supply surely!!
So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen to
them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything you
own.
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I
have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC
is obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me
pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and
over and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get
yourself one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or
something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I
have no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those
tapes?? I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC
should have to supply surely!!
More expedience yet again of your total lack of comprehension. I never suggested the BBC send me new copies of those tapes. I said the BBC is obliged to provide me with new copies of the stories on DVD or Blu-Ray
at cost price of printing the discs (about 30 pence each) plus shipping since I have already paid for the right to watch them.
So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen
to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything you
own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is waiting for me
on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me with it.
On 2025-09-27 6:36 a.m., Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:<CHOP>
So now BBC is supposed to supply brand new DVDs and a television forI didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I
have no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those
tapes?? I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC
should have to supply surely!!
Aggy?-a I seem to be detecting a butt load of entitlement here.
--So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen
to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold
Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything you
own.
That's BBC's job, after all he did spend his hard earned money on this
and should be catered to.....LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
On 28/09/2025 10:21 am, Idlehands wrote:
On 2025-09-27 6:36 a.m., Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:<CHOP>
So now BBC is supposed to supply brand new DVDs and a television forI didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I
have no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those
tapes?? I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC
should have to supply surely!!
Aggy?-a I seem to be detecting a butt load of entitlement here.
DVDs?? They're old hat nowadays, perhaps if Aggy were to request BlueRay
or whatever they're called.
----So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen >>>>>> to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those Gold >>>>> Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything you >>>> own.
That's BBC's job, after all he did spend his hard earned money on this
and should be catered to.....LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
Daniel70
On 28/09/2025 1:38 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when
DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I >>>>>> have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC >>>>>> is obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me
pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and
over and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get
yourself one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or
something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I
have no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
Did The BBC supply you with a T.V. and a Video Player, back when your
tapes were new??
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those
tapes?? I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC
should have to supply surely!!
More expedience yet again of your total lack of comprehension. I never
suggested the BBC send me new copies of those tapes. I said the BBC is
obliged to provide me with new copies of the stories on DVD or Blu-Ray
at cost price of printing the discs (about 30 pence each) plus
shipping since I have already paid for the right to watch them.
I don't know if you purchase hard-copies of your Daily newspaper or not.
If you do .... should you be supplied with a new copy each and ever day??
I mean, .... you HAVE paid for a copy, haven't you?/
No, your 'back-up" is on the tapes that you brought way back when!! YouSo why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost
price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen >>>>>> to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those
Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything
you own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is waiting for me
on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me with it.
paid for the tapes, you received the tapes. End of ....!!
On 28/09/2025 11:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 28/09/2025 1:38 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when >>>>>>>>> DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I >>>>>>> have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC >>>>>>> is obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me >>>>>>> pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and
over and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get >>>>>> yourself one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or
something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I
have no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
Did The BBC supply you with a T.V. and a Video Player, back when your
tapes were new??
Just how stupid are you?
It is clear that you can't comprehend a single thing you read. Anyone
with intelligence would have understood that I was referring to the fact >that I can no longer watch the tapes I bought on the equipment I have
and not make idiotic remarks.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those
tapes?? I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC
should have to supply surely!!
More expedience yet again of your total lack of comprehension. I never
suggested the BBC send me new copies of those tapes. I said the BBC is
obliged to provide me with new copies of the stories on DVD or Blu-Ray
at cost price of printing the discs (about 30 pence each) plus
shipping since I have already paid for the right to watch them.
I don't know if you purchase hard-copies of your Daily newspaper or not.
If you do .... should you be supplied with a new copy each and ever day??
I mean, .... you HAVE paid for a copy, haven't you?/
If I pay for a printed copy I should be entitled to access to the online >version too.
No, your 'back-up" is on the tapes that you brought way back when!! YouSo why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost >>>>>>> price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen >>>>>>> to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those
Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything
you own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is waiting for me
on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me with it.
paid for the tapes, you received the tapes. End of ....!!
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clear you do
not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 28/09/2025 11:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 28/09/2025 1:38 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play
it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when >>>>>>>>> DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I >>>>>>> have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC >>>>>>> is obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me >>>>>>> pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and
over and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get >>>>>> yourself one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or
something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I
have no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
Did The BBC supply you with a T.V. and a Video Player, back when your
tapes were new??
Just how stupid are you?
It is clear that you can't comprehend a single thing you read. Anyone
with intelligence would have understood that I was referring to the fact that I can no longer watch the tapes I bought on the equipment I have
and not make idiotic remarks.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those
tapes?? I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC
should have to supply surely!!
More expedience yet again of your total lack of comprehension. I
never suggested the BBC send me new copies of those tapes. I said the
BBC is obliged to provide me with new copies of the stories on DVD or
Blu-Ray at cost price of printing the discs (about 30 pence each)
plus shipping since I have already paid for the right to watch them.
I don't know if you purchase hard-copies of your Daily newspaper or
not. If you do .... should you be supplied with a new copy each and
ever day??
I mean, .... you HAVE paid for a copy, haven't you?/
If I pay for a printed copy I should be entitled to access to the online version too.
No, your 'back-up" is on the tapes that you brought way back when!!So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost >>>>>>> price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen >>>>>>> to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those
Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything
you own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is waiting for
me on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me with it.
You paid for the tapes, you received the tapes. End of ....!!
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clear you do
not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 28/09/2025 1:38 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play >>>>>>>>>> it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when >>>>>>>>>> DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. I >>>>>>>> have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the BBC >>>>>>>> is obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of making me >>>>>>>> pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and >>>>>>> over and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get >>>>>>> yourself one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or >>>>>>> something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I >>>>>> have no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
Did The BBC supply you with a T.V. and a Video Player, back when your
tapes were new??
Just how stupid are you?
Last time I was tested ...... I.Q. 125+
You??
If your T.V. and/or PVR no longer works .... buy yourself a new one.
It is clear that you can't comprehend a single thing you read. Anyone
with intelligence would have understood that I was referring to the fact
that I can no longer watch the tapes I bought on the equipment I have
.... because that equipment no longer works and I'm too much of a pain
in the arse to purchase new equpiment.
and not make idiotic remarks.
Yes, you do, Aggy.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those
tapes?? I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the BBC >>>>> should have to supply surely!!
More expedience yet again of your total lack of comprehension. I
never suggested the BBC send me new copies of those tapes. I said the >>>> BBC is obliged to provide me with new copies of the stories on DVD or >>>> Blu-Ray at cost price of printing the discs (about 30 pence each)
plus shipping since I have already paid for the right to watch them.
I don't know if you purchase hard-copies of your Daily newspaper or
not. If you do .... should you be supplied with a new copy each and
ever day??
I mean, .... you HAVE paid for a copy, haven't you?/
If I pay for a printed copy I should be entitled to access to the online
version too.
If you paid for your printed copy, do you still HAVE those printed copies??
If not, why not??
Oh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased copies >way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use THOSE copies, theyNo, your 'back-up" is on the tapes that you brought way back when!!So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost >>>>>>>> price. They should not make you pay again for the right to listen >>>>>>>> to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those >>>>>>> Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything >>>>>> you own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is waiting for
me on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me with it.
You paid for the tapes, you received the tapes. End of ....!!
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clear you do
not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
----
Daniel70
In article <10b68sl$117b9$2@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 26/09/2025 12:04, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor
Who tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a
free DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes
shipping. I have already paid for the right to watch the
recording so the BBC is obliged to send me the DVD at cost
price instead of making me pay twice.
I will send you any "Doctor Who" DVD that I still own for -u1
and whatever the shipping is.
In fact I think I offered you one FREE a few months ago and
you never responded. (I can't remember what story we were
talking about at the time.) But yeah, -u1 each is a fair price
for something that's currently just sitting in a plastic box on
top of a wardrobe in the spare room.
So if you want a DVD upgrade, you only have to ask.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at
cost price. They should not make you pay again for the right
to listen to them.
I think we both know how that would go if I sent them an e-mail
saying that!
If you sent them the email then you can show it in court to prove you
have not violated any copyright laws when you download backup copies,
just like I am allowed to download backup copies of the episodes of
Doctor Who that I own on VHS so I will not be needing the DVDs to fill
up yet another box on the floor.
Maybe I should send an entitled e-mail to Parlophone?
Parlophone or whoever owns Apple Records now which I think is
Universal Music through Capitol Records or some other label.
Parlophone was sold to Warner without the Beatles catalogue
being included.
Parlopone is the label of some of my original Beatles LP's...
these are not 2025 re-issues!!! (LiB is Apple alright.) They
are in very bad shape though, so deffo in need of an upgrade.
If they are the originals they might be worth more than the upgrade. Not
so for Doctor Who VHS tapes.
Does a DVD player still exist?
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 28/09/2025 1:38 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I think I made a copy of it on VHS too, or was that just
the original pilot when it was broadcast... Either way I
have no idea now which tape it's on, or even if I can play >>>>>>>>>> it back. I stopped cataloguing my VHS tapes decades ago when >>>>>>>>>> DVD came out.
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor Who
tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a free
DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes shipping. >>>>>>>> I have already paid for the right to watch the recording so the >>>>>>>> BBC is obliged to send me the DVD at cost price instead of
making me pay twice.
You paid your money, you got your copy.
Is it the BBC's fault if you actually watched the Video over and >>>>>>> over and over again ...... or did you pay the extra bucks and get >>>>>>> yourself one of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or >>>>>>> something??
I didn't wear out the tapes. The issue is I don't have a TV and I >>>>>> have no idea if my video recorder can still play them.
Did The BBC supply you with a T.V. and a Video Player, back when your
tapes were new??
Just how stupid are you?
Last time I was tested ...... I.Q. 125+
You??
If your T.V. and/or PVR no longer works .... buy yourself a new one.
It is clear that you can't comprehend a single thing you read. Anyone
with intelligence would have understood that I was referring to the
fact that I can no longer watch the tapes I bought on the equipment I
have
.... because that equipment no longer works and I'm too much of a pain
in the arse to purchase new equpiment.
and not make idiotic remarks.
Yes, you do, Aggy.
So why would you want the BBC to supply you new copies of those
tapes?? I mean, that's what you brought so that would be all the
BBC should have to supply surely!!
More expedience yet again of your total lack of comprehension. I
never suggested the BBC send me new copies of those tapes. I said
the BBC is obliged to provide me with new copies of the stories on
DVD or Blu-Ray at cost price of printing the discs (about 30 pence
each) plus shipping since I have already paid for the right to watch
them.
I don't know if you purchase hard-copies of your Daily newspaper or
not. If you do .... should you be supplied with a new copy each and
ever day??
I mean, .... you HAVE paid for a copy, haven't you?/
If I pay for a printed copy I should be entitled to access to the
online version too.
If you paid for your printed copy, do you still HAVE those printed copies??
If not, why not??
Oh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased copies way- back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use THOSE copies, they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.No, your 'back-up" is on the tapes that you brought way back when!!So why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at cost >>>>>>>> price. They should not make you pay again for the right to
listen to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one of those >>>>>>> Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to everything >>>>>> you own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is waiting for
me on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me with it.
You paid for the tapes, you received the tapes. End of ....!!
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clear you do
not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
On 27/09/2025 00:21, The Doctor wrote:
In article <10b68sl$117b9$2@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 26/09/2025 12:04, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I am still owed DVD copies by the BBC of the Doctor
Who tapes I legally bought.
That's not how buying something works. You don't get a
free DVD upgrade just because you bought the VHS tape.
I will pay -u1 for each replacement DVD which includes
shipping. I have already paid for the right to watch the
recording so the BBC is obliged to send me the DVD at cost
price instead of making me pay twice.
I will send you any "Doctor Who" DVD that I still own for -u1
and whatever the shipping is.
In fact I think I offered you one FREE a few months ago and
you never responded. (I can't remember what story we were
talking about at the time.) But yeah, -u1 each is a fair price
for something that's currently just sitting in a plastic box on
top of a wardrobe in the spare room.
So if you want a DVD upgrade, you only have to ask.
If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD copies of my
Beatles LP's as they are a bit scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement copies at
cost price. They should not make you pay again for the right
to listen to them.
I think we both know how that would go if I sent them an e-mail
saying that!
If you sent them the email then you can show it in court to prove you
have not violated any copyright laws when you download backup copies,
just like I am allowed to download backup copies of the episodes of
Doctor Who that I own on VHS so I will not be needing the DVDs to fill
up yet another box on the floor.
Maybe I should send an entitled e-mail to Parlophone?
Parlophone or whoever owns Apple Records now which I think is
Universal Music through Capitol Records or some other label.
Parlophone was sold to Warner without the Beatles catalogue
being included.
Parlopone is the label of some of my original Beatles LP's...
these are not 2025 re-issues!!! (LiB is Apple alright.) They
are in very bad shape though, so deffo in need of an upgrade.
If they are the originals they might be worth more than the upgrade. Not >>> so for Doctor Who VHS tapes.
Does a DVD player still exist?
I think most major manufactures have stopped making them along with
Blu-Ray players. You can still get Chinese knock offs for about -u20. No >idea if DVD-Audio and SACD still exists. I don't even think they make >receivers with analogue 5.1 inputs any more so how are you even supposed
to play SACD? Can it work over HDMI or SPDIF? Can modern receivers even >decode it?
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 29/09/2025 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 28/09/2025 1:38 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
Oh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased copiesNo, your 'back-up" is on the tapes that you brought way backSo why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD
copies of my Beatles LP's as they are a bit
scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement
copies at cost price. They should not make you pay
again for the right to listen to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one
of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or
something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to
everything you own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is
waiting for me on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me
with it.
when!! You paid for the tapes, you received the tapes. End of
....!!
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clear
you do not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use THOSE copies,
they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
What am I supposed to play them on when I don't have a TV?
I don't even know if my video recorder still works.
Last time I used it it went around mangling tapes or randomly
stopping in the middle of them to prevent them from being mangled
presumably.
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 29/09/2025 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 28/09/2025 1:38 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
Oh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased copiesNo, your 'back-up" is on the tapes that you brought way backSo why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD
copies of my Beatles LP's as they are a bit
scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement
copies at cost price. They should not make you pay
again for the right to listen to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one
of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or
something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to
everything you own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is
waiting for me on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me
with it.
when!! You paid for the tapes, you received the tapes. End of
....!!
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clear
you do not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use THOSE copies,
they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
What am I supposed to play them on when I don't have a TV?
Who's desire was it for you to not have a T.V., Aggy??
I don't even know if my video recorder still works.
Plug it into your computer to see if it works.
Last time I used it it went around mangling tapes or randomly
stopping in the middle of them to prevent them from being mangled
presumably.
How long since you had had it professionally serviced?? Or do you expect
the BBC to do that as well??
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the tapes I bought atSorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC was that
manufacturing price.
written up??
On 04/10/2025 11:40, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 29/09/2025 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:44, Daniel70 wrote:
On 28/09/2025 1:38 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 27/09/2025 13:36, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:47 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 26/09/2025 13:38, Daniel70 wrote:
On 26/09/2025 7:22 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 25/09/2025 20:30, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
Oh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased copiesNo, your 'back-up" is on the tapes that you brought way backSo why didn't you make your (legal) back-ups??If it did work that way I'd love shiny new CD
copies of my Beatles LP's as they are a bit
scratchy and hissy now!!!
Apple Records are obliged to send you replacement
copies at cost price. They should not make you pay
again for the right to listen to them.
Why?? Did you pay the extra bucks and get yourself one
of those Gold Plated "Good for Life" Guarantees or
something??
The law says you are entitled to make backup copies to
everything you own.
With what? I have the right to a backup. That backup is
waiting for me on bittorrent if the BBC will not provide me
with it.
when!! You paid for the tapes, you received the tapes. End of
....!!
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clear
you do not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use THOSE copies,
they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
What am I supposed to play them on when I don't have a TV?
Who's desire was it for you to not have a T.V., Aggy??
Whatever gods caused my last one to break down and start emitting toxic >fumes.
I don't even know if my video recorder still works.
Plug it into your computer to see if it works.
How?
Last time I used it it went around mangling tapes or randomly
stopping in the middle of them to prevent them from being mangled
presumably.
How long since you had had it professionally serviced?? Or do you expect
the BBC to do that as well??
Having it serviced would cost more than its worth.
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the tapes I bought atSorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC was that
manufacturing price.
written up??
The part where it says that I don't actually own the tapes that I bought
but the BBC owns them and everything on them instead.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 04/10/2025 11:40, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 29/09/2025 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clearOh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased copies
you do not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use THOSE copies,
they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
What am I supposed to play them on when I don't have a TV?
Who's desire was it for you to not have a T.V., Aggy??
Whatever gods caused my last one to break down and start emitting toxic fumes.
I don't even know if my video recorder still works.
Plug it into your computer to see if it works.
How?
Last time I used it it went around mangling tapes or randomly
stopping in the middle of them to prevent them from being mangled
presumably.
How long since you had had it professionally serviced?? Or do you expect
the BBC to do that as well??
Having it serviced would cost more than its worth.
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the tapes I bought atSorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC was that
manufacturing price.
written up??
The part where it says that I don't actually own the tapes that I bought
but the BBC owns them and everything on them instead.
On 5/10/2025 3:00 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 04/10/2025 11:40, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 29/09/2025 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It is clearOh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased copies
you do not. My backup is waiting for me on bittorrent.
way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use THOSE copies,
they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
What am I supposed to play them on when I don't have a TV?
Who's desire was it for you to not have a T.V., Aggy??
Whatever gods caused my last one to break down and start emitting
toxic fumes.
AH!! And did those self same Gods supply you with one originally, Aggy??
Or did The BBC supply the original T.V.??
I don't even know if my video recorder still works.
Plug it into your computer to see if it works.
How?
By using whatever appropriate leads you have available. HDMI?? Red/ Green/Black Audio/Video lead?? Whatever??
Last time I used it it went around mangling tapes or randomly
stopping in the middle of them to prevent them from being mangled
presumably.
How long since you had had it professionally serviced?? Or do you expect >>> the BBC to do that as well??
Having it serviced would cost more than its worth.
Well, could be time you spent some of your Hard Earned, Aggy.
Ah!! So the very small print. The Very, Very, Very, small (imaginary)The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the tapes I bought atSorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC was that
manufacturing price.
written up??
The part where it says that I don't actually own the tapes that I
bought but the BBC owns them and everything on them instead.
print.
They must therefore supply
me with new copies on modern formats at cost price without making me pay again for the right to listen to them.
In article <10bu3jo$3h6io$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
They must therefore supply
me with new copies on modern formats at cost price without making me pay
again for the right to listen to them.
Other people have made this
argument, and it looks okay
on paper, but I've never
heard of anyone making the
companies cough up.
Melissa
On 10/5/2025 11:58, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10bu3jo$3h6io$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
They must therefore supply
me with new copies on modern formats at cost price without making me pay >>> again for the right to listen to them.
Other people have made this
argument, and it looks okay
on paper, but I've never
heard of anyone making the
companies cough up.
Melissa
Perhaps Aggy, instead of just spouting off here, should stick out his
neck and demand the BCC, et. al., give him what is owed him...and see if
his request is honored or laughed at.
Can you guess what my money is wagered on?
In article <10bu3jo$3h6io$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
They must therefore supply
me with new copies on modern formats at cost price without making me pay
again for the right to listen to them.
Other people have made this
argument, and it looks okay
on paper, but I've never
heard of anyone making the
companies cough up.
Melissa
The BBC doesn't even have a department that I can email to demand the
modern copies that I am owed. The same applies to the record companies
that sold me CDs, tapes, and vinyl, or the movie studios that sold me
DVDs.
On 10/5/2025 11:58, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10bu3jo$3h6io$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
They must therefore supply
me with new copies on modern formats at cost price without making me pay >>> again for the right to listen to them.
Other people have made this
argument, and it looks okay
on paper, but I've never
heard of anyone making the
companies cough up.
Melissa
Perhaps Aggy, instead of just spouting off here, should stick out his
neck and demand the BCC, et. al., give him what is owed him...and see if
his request is honored or laughed at.
Can you guess what my money is wagered on?
--
Intelligence is no guarantee against being dead wrong.
--Carl Sagan
On 10/5/2025 19:22, The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC doesn't even have a department that I can email to demand the
modern copies that I am owed. The same applies to the record companies
that sold me CDs, tapes, and vinyl, or the movie studios that sold me
DVDs.
Yeah...that should tell you more than you need to know about what you
think you are "owed". Your sense of entitlement is Olympic in size.
In any case, if you truly think you are owed upgrades, perhaps you
should talk to an attorney? I mean, following your logic, there is an >airtight breach-of-contract case here.
----
Intelligence is no guarantee against being dead wrong.
--Carl Sagan
On 10/5/2025 19:22, The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC doesn't even have a department that I can email to demand the
modern copies that I am owed. The same applies to the record companies
that sold me CDs, tapes, and vinyl, or the movie studios that sold me
DVDs.
Yeah...that should tell you more than you need to know about what you
think you are "owed".-a Your sense of entitlement is Olympic in size.
In any case, if you truly think you are owed upgrades, perhaps you
should talk to an attorney?-a I mean, following your logic, there is an airtight breach-of-contract case here.
Perhaps Aggy, instead of just spouting off here, should stick out his
neck and demand the BCC, et. al., give him what is owed him...and see if
his request is honored or laughed at.
On 05/10/2025 11:06, Daniel70 wrote:
On 5/10/2025 3:00 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 04/10/2025 11:40, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 29/09/2025 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It isOh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased
clear you do not. My backup is waiting for me on
bittorrent.
copies way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use
THOSE copies, they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
What am I supposed to play them on when I don't have a TV?
Who's desire was it for you to not have a T.V., Aggy??
Whatever gods caused my last one to break down and start emitting
toxic fumes.
AH!! And did those self same Gods supply you with one originally,
Aggy??
Or did The BBC supply the original T.V.??
What does that have to do with the small print of all of my Doctor
Who tapes which says that the BBC owns them them instead of me
despite me paying for them, and I only paid for the right to watch
them?
If I've already paid for that right why should I have to pay it again
if I buy new copies of the episodes? Do you understand the subject of
the discussion? It is clear you have no comprehension skills at all.
I don't even know if my video recorder still works.
Plug it into your computer to see if it works.
How?
By using whatever appropriate leads you have available. HDMI?? Red/
Green/Black Audio/Video lead?? Whatever??
Just how stupid are you? Do you think a 1990s VHS video recorder came
with HDMI? Do you think a modern computer comes with a SCART
socket?
Last time I used it it went around mangling tapes or
randomly stopping in the middle of them to prevent them from
being mangled presumably.
How long since you had had it professionally serviced?? Or do
you expect the BBC to do that as well??
Having it serviced would cost more than its worth.
Well, could be time you spent some of your Hard Earned, Aggy.
They don't make VHS video recorders any more.
The BBC must replace my tapes with DVDs, Blu-Blu Rays or digital
downloads are cost price, ie. 20 or 30 pence each since I've already
paid for the right to watch them.
Ah!! So the very small print. The Very, Very, Very, smallThe BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the tapes ISorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC was
bought at manufacturing price.
that written up??
The part where it says that I don't actually own the tapes that I
bought but the BBC owns them and everything on them instead.
(imaginary) print.
The small print is big enough to be easily read and it says that the
BBC own by video tapes, not me.
The record companies also claim they
own my CDs instead or me the one that paid for them. They must
therefore supply me with new copies on modern formats at cost price
without making me pay again for the right to listen to them. They
also owe me new backup copies of my vinyl records too and cassette
tapes, and since it seems they no longer seem to be making new DVD
players I am owed new copies for those discs too.
In article <Z0DEQ.20602
$UfT7.13267@fx04.ams4>,
Hornplayer9599@aol.com
says...
Perhaps Aggy, instead of just spouting off here, should stick out his
neck and demand the BCC, et. al., give him what is owed him...and see if
his request is honored or laughed at.
I'm not sure that matters
from a legal standpoint. It's
safe for them to laugh
because they're a lot bigger
than he is, but a judge or a
professor of law might say
something else.
As far as our daily lives are
concerned, then of course
we're not going to get new
media updates. Laws only
exist in their enforcement.
Melissa
On 06/10/2025 02:25, Hornplayer9599 wrote:
On 10/5/2025 19:22, The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC doesn't even have a department that I can email to demand the
modern copies that I am owed. The same applies to the record
companies that sold me CDs, tapes, and vinyl, or the movie studios
that sold me DVDs.
Yeah...that should tell you more than you need to know about what you
think you are "owed".-a Your sense of entitlement is Olympic in size.
In any case, if you truly think you are owed upgrades, perhaps you
should talk to an attorney?-a I mean, following your logic, there is an
airtight breach-of-contract case here.
What there is is a scam.
I am not going to waste my money on a lawyer.
have the right to a back up copy.
On 6/10/2025 2:41 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/10/2025 11:06, Daniel70 wrote:
On 5/10/2025 3:00 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 04/10/2025 11:40, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 29/09/2025 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It isOh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased
clear you do not. My backup is waiting for me on
bittorrent.
copies way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use
THOSE copies, they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
What am I supposed to play them on when I don't have a TV?
Who's desire was it for you to not have a T.V., Aggy??
Whatever gods caused my last one to break down and start emitting
-atoxic fumes.
AH!! And did those self same Gods supply you with one originally,
Aggy??
Or did The BBC supply the original T.V.??
What does that have to do with the small print of all of my Doctor
Who tapes which says that the BBC owns them them instead of me
despite me paying for them, and I only paid for the right to watch
them?
Sorry!! Do you mean the Fine Print that states that The BBC (or
whomever) owns THE COPY-WRITE so you don't own the program JUST that tape
of the program??
If I've already paid for that right why should I have to pay it again
if I buy new copies of the episodes? Do you understand the subject of
the discussion? It is clear you have no comprehension skills at all.
I don't even know if my video recorder still works.
Plug it into your computer to see if it works.
How?
By using whatever appropriate leads you have available. HDMI?? Red/
-aGreen/Black Audio/Video lead?? Whatever??
Just how stupid are you? Do you think a 1990s VHS video recorder came
with HDMI? Do you think a modern computer comes with a SCART
socket?
Just how stupid are you? Didn't your 1990s VHS recorder come equiped
with A/V plugs??
Last time I used it it went around mangling tapes or
randomly stopping in the middle of them to prevent them from
being mangled presumably.
How long since you had had it professionally serviced?? Or do
you expect the BBC to do that as well??
Having it serviced would cost more than its worth.
Well, could be time you spent some of your Hard Earned, Aggy.
They don't make VHS video recorders any more.
Maybe not knew, but .....
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html? _nkw=VHS+player&_sacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313
(Don't know why the Walkman was there .... Oh. Look. It is/was a VCR,
too!! Maybe NOT VHS, though.
The BBC must replace my tapes with DVDs, Blu-Blu Rays or digital
downloads are cost price, ie. 20 or 30 pence each since I've already
paid for the right to watch them.
.... and you HAVE watched them, haven't you, Aggy??
Ah!! So the very small print. The Very, Very, Very, smallThe BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the tapes ISorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC was
bought at manufacturing price.
that written up??
The part where it says that I don't actually own the tapes that I
-abought but the BBC owns them and everything on them instead.
(imaginary) print.
The small print is big enough to be easily read and it says that the
BBC own by video tapes, not me.
Well, what are you doing with them, Aggy?? Did you steal them from The
BBC??
The record companies also claim theyBut what if they don't own the copy-write for those formats, Aggy??
own my CDs instead or me the one that paid for them. They must
therefore supply me with new copies on modern formats at cost price
without making me pay again for the right to listen to them. They
also owe me new backup copies of my vinyl records too and cassette
tapes, and since it seems they no longer seem to be making new DVD
players I am owed new copies for those discs too.
On 10/5/2025 22:06, The True Doctor wrote:
On 06/10/2025 02:25, Hornplayer9599 wrote:
On 10/5/2025 19:22, The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC doesn't even have a department that I can email to demand
the modern copies that I am owed. The same applies to the record
companies that sold me CDs, tapes, and vinyl, or the movie studios
that sold me DVDs.
Yeah...that should tell you more than you need to know about what you
think you are "owed".-a Your sense of entitlement is Olympic in size.
In any case, if you truly think you are owed upgrades, perhaps you
should talk to an attorney?-a I mean, following your logic, there is
an airtight breach-of-contract case here.
What there is is a scam.
Which would be legally actionable.
I am not going to waste my money on a lawyer.
Probably because you already know that no reputable attorney would take
your case.-a That, or you would rather sit in the corner and whinge than
actually take action to get the restitution you claim is yours.
The law in the UK says I
have the right to a back up copy.
Unless you can provide the specific UK statutes that state this, I'm
going to go out on a limb and say that you misread the statute, and that
like in other countries you have the right to back up your purchased
copies /on/ /your/ /own/.-a I own approximately 1100 CDs and DVDs.-a I
have ripped all of them into iTunes and have them backed up in the
cloud.-a Done...simple.-a There are, still, VCR/DVD combo machines manufactured, or available on Ebay, where you can transfer tapes to
DVD...which you can then rip into a digital file.-a Yeah, you would have
to either sit with the tape so that you can manually add chapters to the DVD, or just let the thing run in the background on its own and not make chapter breaks. Up to you.-a >
Still having laptop issues?
On 06/10/2025 12:19, Daniel70 wrote:
On 6/10/2025 2:41 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/10/2025 11:06, Daniel70 wrote:
On 5/10/2025 3:00 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 04/10/2025 11:40, Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 29/09/2025 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 29/09/2025 5:11 am, The True Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Do you understand the meaning of the term back up? It isOh!! Sorry! I thought you had typed that you HAD purchased
clear you do not. My backup is waiting for me on
bittorrent.
copies way-back-when .... so, if you haven't/couldn't use
THOSE copies, they SHOULD still be usable, Aggy.
What am I supposed to play them on when I don't have a TV?
Who's desire was it for you to not have a T.V., Aggy??
Whatever gods caused my last one to break down and start emitting
-atoxic fumes.
AH!! And did those self same Gods supply you with one originally,
Aggy??
Or did The BBC supply the original T.V.??
What does that have to do with the small print of all of my Doctor
Who tapes which says that the BBC owns them them instead of me
despite me paying for them, and I only paid for the right to watch
them?
Sorry!! Do you mean the Fine Print that states that The BBC (or
whomever) owns THE COPY-WRITE so you don't own the program JUST that tape
of the program??
No. The small print says I don't own the tape I paid for and that I only >have to right to watch the contents. The bullshit, I mean small print
also says I may not copy or resell the tape which is explicitly against
the British Copyright Act which actually says I have the right to make
as many copies of the contents of tape as I want and allow anyone I wish
to watch it. See Bob Monkhouse vs. the Copyright Morons where Bob
Monkhouse won and Sony vs. the Copyright Morons where Sony won, which
was of course before Sony become one of the Copyright Morons.
If I've already paid for that right why should I have to pay it again
if I buy new copies of the episodes? Do you understand the subject of
the discussion? It is clear you have no comprehension skills at all. >>>>>>> I don't even know if my video recorder still works.
Plug it into your computer to see if it works.
How?
By using whatever appropriate leads you have available. HDMI?? Red/
-aGreen/Black Audio/Video lead?? Whatever??
Just how stupid are you? Do you think a 1990s VHS video recorder came
with HDMI? Do you think a modern computer comes with a SCART
socket?
Just how stupid are you? Didn't your 1990s VHS recorder come equiped
with A/V plugs??
More evidence of your total and utter ignorance and stupidity. In Europe >video recorders made in the 90s only came with SCART sockets and
computers have never come with either those or AV sockets.
Last time I used it it went around mangling tapes or
randomly stopping in the middle of them to prevent them from
being mangled presumably.
How long since you had had it professionally serviced?? Or do
you expect the BBC to do that as well??
Having it serviced would cost more than its worth.
Well, could be time you spent some of your Hard Earned, Aggy.
They don't make VHS video recorders any more.
Maybe not knew, but .....
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?
_nkw=VHS+player&_sacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313
(Don't know why the Walkman was there .... Oh. Look. It is/was a VCR,
too!! Maybe NOT VHS, though.
Those are second hand American VCRs so how do I know they will work and
my tapes are in 625 line 25Hz PAL, not 525 line 30Hz NTSC. Do you have
the remotest clue about video standards?
The BBC must replace my tapes with DVDs, Blu-Blu Rays or digital
downloads are cost price, ie. 20 or 30 pence each since I've already
paid for the right to watch them.
.... and you HAVE watched them, haven't you, Aggy??
I watched them when I still could.
Ah!! So the very small print. The Very, Very, Very, smallThe BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the tapes ISorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC was
bought at manufacturing price.
that written up??
The part where it says that I don't actually own the tapes that I
-abought but the BBC owns them and everything on them instead.
(imaginary) print.
The small print is big enough to be easily read and it says that the
BBC own by video tapes, not me.
Well, what are you doing with them, Aggy?? Did you steal them from The
BBC??
I legally bought and paid for them. Despite that the BBC claims that
they own them instead of me. If they own them they owe me replacement
copies that I can play back on modern equipment.
The record companies also claim theyBut what if they don't own the copy-write for those formats, Aggy??
own my CDs instead or me the one that paid for them. They must
therefore supply me with new copies on modern formats at cost price
without making me pay again for the right to listen to them. They
also owe me new backup copies of my vinyl records too and cassette
tapes, and since it seems they no longer seem to be making new DVD
players I am owed new copies for those discs too.
Of course they own the copyright for those formats. Are you trying to
make out that the BBC don't own Doctor Who? If that is the case then
they can forget about claiming back copies of lost episodes which the
BBC deliberately junked or erased which are now in the hands of collectors.
In fact the BBC have confirmed that everything I have said is correct in
the thread "[RUMOUR] More 'lost' "Doctor Who" episodes found" which was >started by Your Name.
<<On Facebook, Film is Fabulous wrote:
"As mentioned by Sue Malden at our RECOVERED event in May,
we are aware of several missing episodes of Doctor Who (Sue
stated one [or] two, but there are more than this) in private
film collections in the UK. We are liaising with the
individuals about cataloguing and preserving their entire
collection, including the missing Doctor Who episodes, and
ensuring that copies are returned to the BBC. We expect to
make a detailed announcement shortly." >>
See, the BBC is claiming ownership of other people's private recordings
and even demanding they be returned to the BBC in exchange for copies.
Well where are my replacement copies? When can I expect a visit from
them to take away my VHS tapes and replace them with Digital copies?
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in
it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the >text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in
it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
In article <10c35ut$vrbd$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the
text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in
it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070
Super, as well as Intel's
onboard graphics.
This laptop is several years
old and has suffered
structural damage from a
fall, and it has a tendency
to overheat massively and
crash when asked to do
intensive graphics work.
That's precisely why I had to
buy a desktop despite owning
a fairly mighty laptop.
I've learned to live with the
short lines, but I can see
why they're annoying to read,
so I'm open to suggestions. A
lower screen resolution might
help, but that would
interfere with my work, which
is back on the laptop until
my living situation is
sorted.
Melissa
In article <10c35ut$vrbd$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the
text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in
it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070
Super, as well as Intel's
onboard graphics.
This laptop is several years
old and has suffered
structural damage from a
fall, and it has a tendency
to overheat massively and
crash when asked to do
intensive graphics work.
That's precisely why I had to
buy a desktop despite owning
a fairly mighty laptop.
I've learned to live with the
short lines, but I can see
why they're annoying to read,
so I'm open to suggestions. A
lower screen resolution might
help, but that would
interfere with my work, which
is back on the laptop until
my living situation is
sorted.
Melissa
In article <MPG.434ef4fc40c3353f9896bd@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c35ut$vrbd$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>, >>>>>> The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the >>> text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in
it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070
Super, as well as Intel's
onboard graphics.
This laptop is several years
old and has suffered
structural damage from a
fall, and it has a tendency
to overheat massively and
crash when asked to do
intensive graphics work.
That's precisely why I had to
buy a desktop despite owning
a fairly mighty laptop.
I've learned to live with the
short lines, but I can see
why they're annoying to read,
so I'm open to suggestions. A
lower screen resolution might
help, but that would
interfere with my work, which
is back on the laptop until
my living situation is
sorted.
Melissa
Can you trying replacing the motherbaord?
In article <10c35ut$vrbd$2@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the
text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in
it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
Or a font issue.
Can you trying replacing the motherbaord?
Can you trying replacing the motherbaord?
Go to Graphics Settings in Windows and set your 2070 as the default card
for all the apps you need it for. You might also have to do this in the
apps themselves. It will also allow you to set which GPU to use when the laptop is on batter or plugged in.
On 07/10/2025 16:00, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10c35ut$vrbd$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>, >>>>>> The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the >>> text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in
it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070
Super, as well as Intel's
onboard graphics.
A laptop 2070 Super is basically the same as a desktop 1060 minus the
ray tracing of course. It's barley capable of 4K. A desktop 5090 is the
only GPU capable of 4K if you want to use it for gaming or video
editing, otherwise your GPU will only be reliable displaying text.
This laptop is several years
old and has suffered
structural damage from a
fall, and it has a tendency
to overheat massively and
crash when asked to do
intensive graphics work.
That leads me to suspect that your 2070 isn't set as your main graphics >card. Laptops always default to the CPU graphics which uses less power
so you have to set the 2070 as your default card in Windows graphics >settings and/or in the application you are using.
That's precisely why I had to
buy a desktop despite owning
a fairly mighty laptop.
I've learned to live with the
short lines, but I can see
why they're annoying to read,
so I'm open to suggestions. A
lower screen resolution might
help, but that would
interfere with my work, which
is back on the laptop until
my living situation is
sorted.
Melissa
Go to Graphics Settings in Windows and set your 2070 as the default card
for all the apps you need it for. You might also have to do this in the
apps themselves. It will also allow you to set which GPU to use when the >laptop is on batter or plugged in.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 07/10/2025 16:22, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434ef4fc40c3353f9896bd@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c35ut$vrbd$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>, >>>>>>> The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the >>>> text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in >>>> it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070
Super, as well as Intel's
onboard graphics.
This laptop is several years
old and has suffered
structural damage from a
fall, and it has a tendency
to overheat massively and
crash when asked to do
intensive graphics work.
That's precisely why I had to
buy a desktop despite owning
a fairly mighty laptop.
I've learned to live with the
short lines, but I can see
why they're annoying to read,
so I'm open to suggestions. A
lower screen resolution might
help, but that would
interfere with my work, which
is back on the laptop until
my living situation is
sorted.
Melissa
Can you trying replacing the motherbaord?
On a laptop? She might as well buy a brand new laptop.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
On 07/10/2025 16:18, The Doctor wrote:
In article <10c35ut$vrbd$2@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article <MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>, >>>>>> The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop.
I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it
being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't
figured out anything to do
about it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is
3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny is the >>> text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an RTX 5090 in
it or does it only have integrated graphics on the CPU?
Or a font issue.
No.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
The Binky Doctor wrote:^^^^^<-PAedophile talker noted
^^^^^<-PAedophile talker notedCan you trying replacing the motherbaord?
Look at stinky binky acting like he knows wtf he's yammering about.
In article <10c3b7k$2dtt$4
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Can you trying replacing the motherbaord?
In a laptop?
Melissa
In article <10c3d65$11upv$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
Go to Graphics Settings in Windows and set your 2070 as the default card
for all the apps you need it for. You might also have to do this in the
apps themselves. It will also allow you to set which GPU to use when the
laptop is on batter or plugged in.
I just checked, and it's
already set for the
application in question.
I think it's just the damage.
Melissa--
In article <10c3d65$11upv$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
Go to Graphics Settings in Windows and set your 2070 as the default card
for all the apps you need it for. You might also have to do this in the
apps themselves. It will also allow you to set which GPU to use when the
laptop is on batter or plugged in.
I just checked, and it's
already set for the
application in question.
I think it's just the damage.
Melissa
On 07/10/2025 20:58, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10c3d65$11upv$2
@dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM
says...
Go to Graphics Settings in Windows and set your 2070 as the default card >>> for all the apps you need it for. You might also have to do this in the
apps themselves. It will also allow you to set which GPU to use when the >>> laptop is on batter or plugged in.
I just checked, and it's
already set for the
application in question.
I think it's just the damage.
Melissa
Install MSI Afterburner and see what temperature your graphics is at. If >it's above 85C then you are screwed. You should aim for 70C when under
heavy load.
Take off the heatsink and apply some new thermal paste on the chips it >covers and put it back again. I might be making bad contact.
----
The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw
"To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
In article <10c35ut$vrbd$2 @dont-email.me>,
agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM says...
On 07/10/2025 05:44, The Doctor wrote:
In article
<MPG.434e2fc86b5a3dd59896bc@news.eternal-september.org>, The True
Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c1o02$ljd$2 @gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says...
In article
<MPG.434e078c61d0c0899896b7@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c0902$1vqk$3 @gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says...
Still having laptop issues?
Yeah, still using the laptop. I'm stuck in hotel life for
several more weeks.
I think you're right about it being related to screen
resolution, but I haven't figured out anything to do about
it.
Melissa
Which opreating system?
Win10. Screen resolution is 3840x2160.
Melissa
All right. NExt is the software.
A 4K laptop? I didn't even think anyone made 4K laptops. How tiny
is the text? How about next is the graphics card? Does she have an
RTX 5090 in it or does it only have integrated graphics on the
CPU?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super, as well as Intel's onboard graphics.
This laptop is several years old and has suffered structural damage
from a fall, and it has a tendency to overheat massively and crash
when asked to do intensive graphics work. That's precisely why I had
to buy a desktop despite owning a fairly mighty laptop.
I've learned to live with the short lines, but I can see why they're
annoying to read, so I'm open to suggestions. A lower screen
resolution might help, but that would interfere with my work, which
is back on the laptop until my living situation is sorted.
Melissa
The Binky Doctor wrote:
Can you trying replacing the motherbaord?Look at stinky binky acting like he knows wtf he's yammering about.
In article <10c3b7k$2dtt$4
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Can you trying replacing the motherbaord?
In a laptop?
Melissa
Melissa, on your screen, are the lines of text going from one side of
the screen to the other .... or are you also seeing "short lines"??
In your device's set-up, can you disable Wrapping??
In article <10c5914$1fssp$1@dont-email.me>, daniel47@nomail.afraid.org says...
Melissa, on your screen, are the lines of text going from one side of
the screen to the other .... or are you also seeing "short lines"??
They were short on my end as well.
In your device's set-up, can you disable Wrapping??
You're a genius. I have turned wrapping off entirely
and will simply treat it like a typewriter.
Problem solved!
Melissa
On 8/10/2025 3:46 am, Rudy Canoza wrote:^^^^^<-PAedphile talker noted
The Binky Doctor wrote:
^^^^^<-PAedphile talker notedCan you trying replacing the motherbaord?Look at stinky binky acting like he knows wtf he's yammering about.
^^^^^<-PAedphile talker notedOHH!! Come on, Rudy, Binky runs one of THE most powerful ISP businesses
in all of Canada (if not the World).--
He MUST know what he's doing, surely!! ;-P
--
Daniel70
On 8/10/2025 6:47 am, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10c3b7k$2dtt$4Anything *IS* possible, Melissa ..... but most reasonable people would >probably replace the laptop first.
@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
Can you trying replacing the motherbaord?
In a laptop?
Melissa
----
Daniel70
In article <10c5914$1fssp$1@dont-email.me>, daniel47@nomail.afraid.org says... >> Melissa, on your screen, are the lines of text going from one side of
the screen to the other .... or are you also seeing "short lines"??
They were short on my end as well.
In your device's set-up, can you disable Wrapping??
You're a genius. I have turned wrapping off entirely
and will simply treat it like a typewriter.
Problem solved!
Melissa
On 8/10/2025 8:09 pm, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10c5914$1fssp$1@dont-email.me>, daniel47@nomail.afraid.org says...There would be some that might argue with your having assessed me as
Melissa, on your screen, are the lines of text going from one side of
the screen to the other .... or are you also seeing "short lines"??
They were short on my end as well.
In your device's set-up, can you disable Wrapping??
You're a genius. I have turned wrapping off entirely
and will simply treat it like a typewriter.
Problem solved!
Melissa
being a genius, Melissa .... but I'll accept it. ;-)
----
Daniel70
There yo go! Were you expecting this from a newsgroup?
In article <10c5sr6$3174$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says... >> There yo go! Were you expecting this from a newsgroup?
Not exactly, but I'm also not completely shocked. Usenet has a higher >percentage of clever people than most forums.
Melissa
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
Sorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC
was that written up??
In article
<MPG.43506b2e2fb63099896c5@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c5sr6$3174$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says...
There yo go! Were you expecting this from a newsgroup?
Not exactly, but I'm also not completely shocked. Usenet
has a higher percentage of clever people than most forums.
Yes!!
The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
Are you still going on about this?
I go away on holiday, enjoy some sunshine, return, turn
on the laptop... and nothing's changed!!!
The Doctor wrote:
In article
<MPG.43506b2e2fb63099896c5@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <10c5sr6$3174$3@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says...
There yo go! Were you expecting this from a newsgroup?
Not exactly, but I'm also not completely shocked. Usenet
has a higher percentage of clever people than most forums.
Yes!!
It's also true that Usenet has its fair share of idiots too
though...
It's also true that Usenet has its fair share of idiots too
though...
In article <xn0pbu0vvmrkuup000@post.eweka.nl>, blueshirt@indigo.news says... >> It's also true that Usenet has its fair share of idiots too
though...
Now, see, I don't mind the idiots and kooks that much. It's a truly
free discussion forum, so that's bound to happen. Also, I sometimes
suspect I am one of the kooks.
Melissa
On 9/10/2025 7:05 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
I go away on holiday, enjoy some sunshine, return,
turn on the laptop... and nothing's changed!!!
"holiday" .... and here was I wondering if you might
have taken Mrs Blueshirt to see the Yankee football
that was in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
In article <xn0pbu0vvmrkuup000@post.eweka.nl>,
blueshirt@indigo.news says...
It's also true that Usenet has its fair share of
idiots too though...
Now, see, I don't mind the idiots and kooks that much.
It's a truly free discussion forum, so that's bound to
happen. Also, I sometimes suspect I am one of the kooks.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of theSorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
was that written up??
He's trolling.
If the BBC sent Agamemnon Blu-Ray 'upgrades' of the Doctor Who
stories he owns on VHS tape for free he wouldn't be able to play
them anyway...
Plus, he's almost certainly got most of them downloaded onto a
hard drive somewhere. So he would have done his own upgrading
via uTorrent.
The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
Are you still going on about this?
I go away on holiday, enjoy some sunshine, return, turn
on the laptop... and nothing's changed!!!
On 09/10/2025 09:05, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
Are you still going on about this?
I go away on holiday, enjoy some sunshine, return, turn
on the laptop... and nothing's changed!!!
How long was your holiday?
6 hours?
On 09/10/2025 09:05, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
Sorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC
was that written up??
He's trolling.
If the BBC sent Agamemnon Blu-Ray 'upgrades' of the Doctor
Who stories he owns on VHS tape for free he wouldn't be able
to play them anyway...
Plus, he's almost certainly got most of them downloaded onto
a hard drive somewhere. So he would have done his own
upgrading via uTorrent.
Wrong.
But I will have if the BBC don't send me the 'upgrades'
they owe me for what I have already paid for so I can actually
watch the episodes again.
You have access to the BBC iPlayer. Nothing is stopping you from
watching those episodes.
Unless your favourite Doctor Who episodes just happen to be "The
Seeds of Doom" and "Terror of the Zygons"!
Daniel70 wrote:
On 9/10/2025 7:05 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
"holiday" .... and here was I wondering if you might
I go away on holiday, enjoy some sunshine, return,
turn on the laptop... and nothing's changed!!!
have taken Mrs Blueshirt to see the Yankee football
that was in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
2) Mrs Blueshirt doesn't like sports.
The True Melissa wrote:
In article <xn0pbu0vvmrkuup000@post.eweka.nl>,
blueshirt@indigo.news says...
It's also true that Usenet has its fair share of
idiots too though...
Now, see, I don't mind the idiots and kooks that much.
It's a truly free discussion forum, so that's bound to
happen. Also, I sometimes suspect I am one of the kooks.
Well, if you look at it THAT way... then we're all kooks!!!
Just some here are more kookier than others... ;-)
The True Doctor wrote:
On 09/10/2025 09:05, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of the
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
Are you still going on about this?
I go away on holiday, enjoy some sunshine, return, turn
on the laptop... and nothing's changed!!!
How long was your holiday?
NOT LONG ENOUGH!
6 hours?
I like it when you try humour...
In article <xn0pbudhun8oh9x002@post.eweka.nl>, blueshirt@indigo.news says... >> You have access to the BBC iPlayer. Nothing is stopping you from
watching those episodes.
Unless your favourite Doctor Who episodes just happen to be "The
Seeds of Doom" and "Terror of the Zygons"!
Or "An Unearthly Child," which is legit of historical importance.
I wish they'd sort out the rights.
Melissa
On 09/10/2025 09:05, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 4/10/2025 4:52 am, The True Doctor wrote:
The BBC are obliged to send me backup copies of theSorry!! Where in the "agreement" between you and the BBC
tapes I bought at manufacturing price.
was that written up??
He's trolling.
If the BBC sent Agamemnon Blu-Ray 'upgrades' of the Doctor Who
stories he owns on VHS tape for free he wouldn't be able to play
them anyway...
Plus, he's almost certainly got most of them downloaded onto a
hard drive somewhere. So he would have done his own upgrading
via uTorrent.
Wrong. But I will have if the BBC don't send me the 'upgrades' they owe
me for what I have already paid for so I can actually watch the episodes again. Also if I want to complete a series by buying a Blu-Ray and I
have already got most of the other episodes on VHS I should not have to
pay again for the episodes I already have. I don't have to pay twice if
I complete an album on iTunes so the same must apply to Doctor Who on Blu-Ray.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 9/10/2025 7:05 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
"holiday" .... and here was I wondering if you might
I go away on holiday, enjoy some sunshine, return,
turn on the laptop... and nothing's changed!!!
have taken Mrs Blueshirt to see the Yankee football
that was in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
2) Mrs Blueshirt doesn't like sports.
On 10/10/2025 1:10 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 9/10/2025 7:05 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
"holiday" .... and here was I wondering if you might
I go away on holiday, enjoy some sunshine, return,
turn on the laptop... and nothing's changed!!!
have taken Mrs Blueshirt to see the Yankee football
that was in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the shit out of
me, today, when one of the NFL commentators referred to RUGBY
mid-Broadcast today!!
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer to Australian >Rules Football!!
2) Mrs Blueshirt doesn't like sports.Oh!! One of THOSE spoil-sports!!
----
Daniel70
On 10/10/2025 1:10 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
"holiday" .... and here was I wondering if you might
have taken Mrs Blueshirt to see the Yankee football
that was in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the
shit out of me, today, when one of the NFL commentators
referred to RUGBY mid-Broadcast today!!
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer
to Australian Rules Football!!
2) Mrs Blueshirt doesn't like sports.
Oh!! One of THOSE spoil-sports!!
On 10/10/2025 3:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
But I will have to if the BBC don't send me the 'upgrades'
they owe me for what I have already paid for so I can
actually watch the episodes again. Also if I want to
complete a series by buying a Blu-Ray and I have already
got most of the other episodes on VHS I should not have to
pay again for the episodes I already have. I don't have to
pay twice if I complete an album on iTunes so the same must
apply to Doctor Who on Blu-Ray.
Hmmm!! Maybe, if you, Aggy, were to send The BBC a list of
those Episodes that you have on VHS .... they might send you
those Episodes on DVD and/or Blu-Ray .... or, maybe, they'll
send you a Link to their Secret storage trove .... MAYBE!!
In article <xn0pbudhun8oh9x002@post.eweka.nl>,
blueshirt@indigo.news says...
You have access to the BBC iPlayer. Nothing is stopping you
from watching those episodes.
Unless your favourite Doctor Who episodes just happen to be
"The Seeds of Doom" and "Terror of the Zygons"!
Or "An Unearthly Child," which is legit of historical
importance.
I wish they'd sort out the rights.
The True Melissa wrote:
In article <xn0pbudhun8oh9x002@post.eweka.nl>,
blueshirt@indigo.news says...
You have access to the BBC iPlayer. Nothing is stopping you
from watching those episodes.
Unless your favourite Doctor Who episodes just happen to be
"The Seeds of Doom" and "Terror of the Zygons"!
Or "An Unearthly Child," which is legit of historical
importance.
In fairness, it is. Most fans would have the VHS or DVD
somewhere anyway, but is part of BBC television history so
that first episode of their longest running show is very
important. Which is why I blame them for not nailing the
rights down earlier and allowing this situation to arise.
I wish they'd sort out the rights.
Based on public comments by Stef Coburn about the BBC and
modern "Doctor Who" I'd say it won't be happening anytime
soon.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:10 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
"holiday" .... and here was I wondering if you might
have taken Mrs Blueshirt to see the Yankee football
that was in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the
shit out of me, today, when one of the NFL commentators
referred to RUGBY mid-Broadcast today!!
Rugby -> NFL I can understand, but either way it ain't football
if you don't kick the ball. The clue is in the word.
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer
to Australian Rules Football!!
If you want to call your sport football... kick the fucking ball!
2) Mrs Blueshirt doesn't like sports.Oh!! One of THOSE spoil-sports!!
Yeah, they're called women... ;-)
The True Melissa wrote:
In article <xn0pbudhun8oh9x002@post.eweka.nl>,
blueshirt@indigo.news says...
You have access to the BBC iPlayer. Nothing is stopping you
from watching those episodes.
Unless your favourite Doctor Who episodes just happen to be
"The Seeds of Doom" and "Terror of the Zygons"!
Or "An Unearthly Child," which is legit of historical
importance.
In fairness, it is. Most fans would have the VHS or DVD
somewhere anyway, but is part of BBC television history so
that first episode of their longest running show is very
important. Which is why I blame them for not nailing the
rights down earlier and allowing this situation to arise.
I wish they'd sort out the rights.
Based on public comments by Stef Coburn about the BBC and
modern "Doctor Who" I'd say it won't be happening anytime
soon.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 10/10/2025 3:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
Hmmm!! Maybe, if you, Aggy, were to send The BBC a list of
But I will have to if the BBC don't send me the 'upgrades'
they owe me for what I have already paid for so I can
actually watch the episodes again. Also if I want to
complete a series by buying a Blu-Ray and I have already
got most of the other episodes on VHS I should not have to
pay again for the episodes I already have. I don't have to
pay twice if I complete an album on iTunes so the same must
apply to Doctor Who on Blu-Ray.
those Episodes that you have on VHS .... they might send you
those Episodes on DVD and/or Blu-Ray .... or, maybe, they'll
send you a Link to their Secret storage trove .... MAYBE!!
At a guess I'd say they'd roll around the floor laughing at
that request... before composing a polite thank you response.
Actually, on a serious note... he should send them an e-mail
requesting upgrades for his VHS collection. It'd be interesting
to know what they would say.
I mean, what's the point in moaning here if you don't actually
do something about it? (Don't ask, don't get.)
Daniel70 wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:10 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
"holiday" .... and here was I wondering if you might
have taken Mrs Blueshirt to see the Yankee football
that was in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the
shit out of me, today, when one of the NFL commentators
referred to RUGBY mid-Broadcast today!!
Rugby -> NFL I can understand, but either way it ain't football
if you don't kick the ball. The clue is in the word.
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer
to Australian Rules Football!!
If you want to call your sport football... kick the fucking ball!
On 11/10/2025 2:14 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
I wish they'd sort out the rights.
Based on public comments by Stef Coburn about the BBC and
modern "Doctor Who" I'd say it won't be happening anytime
soon.
As it seems "Doctor Who" IS popular (again), I could sort of
understand Coburn wanting as much as he can get.
I wonder if HE is actually a "Doctor Who" fan .... or was
it shoved down his throat soooo much as a Kid that he was
turned off it.
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
On 11/10/2025 2:07 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
Hmmm!! Maybe, if you, Aggy, were to send The BBC a list
of those Episodes that you have on VHS .... they might
send you those Episodes on DVD and/or Blu-Ray .... or,
maybe, they'll send you a Link to their Secret storage
trove... MAYBE!!
At a guess I'd say they'd roll around the floor laughing
at that request... before composing a polite thank you
response.
Actually, on a serious note... he should send them an
e-mail requesting upgrades for his VHS collection. It'd
be interesting to know what they would say.
I mean, what's the point in moaning here if you don't
actually do something about it? (Don't ask, don't get.)
Welcome Back!! ;-)
On 11/10/2025 2:14 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:As it seems "Doctor Who" *IS* popular (again), I could sort of
In article <xn0pbudhun8oh9x002@post.eweka.nl>,
blueshirt@indigo.news says...
You have access to the BBC iPlayer. Nothing is stopping you
from watching those episodes.
Unless your favourite Doctor Who episodes just happen to be
"The Seeds of Doom" and "Terror of the Zygons"!
Or "An Unearthly Child," which is legit of historical
importance.
In fairness, it is. Most fans would have the VHS or DVD
somewhere anyway, but is part of BBC television history so
that first episode of their longest running show is very
important. Which is why I blame them for not nailing the
rights down earlier and allowing this situation to arise.
I wish they'd sort out the rights.
Based on public comments by Stef Coburn about the BBC and
modern "Doctor Who" I'd say it won't be happening anytime
soon.
understand Coburn wanting as much as he can get.
I wonder if HE is actually a "Doctor Who" fan .... or was it shoved down
his throat soooo much as a Kid that he was turned off it.
----
Daniel70
On 11/10/2025 2:07 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:Welcome Back!! ;-)
On 10/10/2025 3:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
Hmmm!! Maybe, if you, Aggy, were to send The BBC a list of
But I will have to if the BBC don't send me the 'upgrades'
they owe me for what I have already paid for so I can
actually watch the episodes again. Also if I want to
complete a series by buying a Blu-Ray and I have already
got most of the other episodes on VHS I should not have to
pay again for the episodes I already have. I don't have to
pay twice if I complete an album on iTunes so the same must
apply to Doctor Who on Blu-Ray.
those Episodes that you have on VHS .... they might send you
those Episodes on DVD and/or Blu-Ray .... or, maybe, they'll
send you a Link to their Secret storage trove .... MAYBE!!
At a guess I'd say they'd roll around the floor laughing at
that request... before composing a polite thank you response.
Actually, on a serious note... he should send them an e-mail
requesting upgrades for his VHS collection. It'd be interesting
to know what they would say.
I mean, what's the point in moaning here if you don't actually
do something about it? (Don't ask, don't get.)
----
Daniel70
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 10/10/2025 1:10 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
"holiday" .... and here was I wondering if you might
have taken Mrs Blueshirt to see the Yankee football
that was in Ireland a couple of weeks ago.
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the
shit out of me, today, when one of the NFL commentators
referred to RUGBY mid-Broadcast today!!
Rugby -> NFL I can understand, but either way it ain't football
if you don't kick the ball. The clue is in the word.
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer
to Australian Rules Football!!
If you want to call your sport football... kick the ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe not as often as
in Soccer (or do you actually call that Football??), but still we kick
the ball FAIRLY often. 100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
----
Daniel70
Daniel70 wrote:
On 11/10/2025 2:14 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
I wish they'd sort out the rights.
Based on public comments by Stef Coburn about the BBC and
modern "Doctor Who" I'd say it won't be happening anytime
soon.
As it seems "Doctor Who" IS popular (again), I could sort of
understand Coburn wanting as much as he can get.
That's fair enough. If you own the rights to something (even
if it's only a percentage) then yes, wanting as much as you
can get for them is perfectly reasonable. I'm sure most of us
here would look at it the same way.
I wonder if HE is actually a "Doctor Who" fan .... or was
it shoved down his throat soooo much as a Kid that he was
turned off it.
He certainly seems to have been turned off of the modern
version of the show. (He's clearly not a fan of Ncuti Gatwa's
Doctor anyway!)
Daniel70 wrote:
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Daniel70 wrote:
On 11/10/2025 2:07 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:Welcome Back!! ;-)
Hmmm!! Maybe, if you, Aggy, were to send The BBC a list
of those Episodes that you have on VHS .... they might
send you those Episodes on DVD and/or Blu-Ray .... or,
maybe, they'll send you a Link to their Secret storage
trove... MAYBE!!
At a guess I'd say they'd roll around the floor laughing
at that request... before composing a polite thank you
response.
Actually, on a serious note... he should send them an
e-mail requesting upgrades for his VHS collection. It'd
be interesting to know what they would say.
I mean, what's the point in moaning here if you don't
actually do something about it? (Don't ask, don't get.)
:-)
I reckon people could disappear from RADW for a year and
they'd still find the same arguments going around and
around upon their return... like they had never been
away!
RADW is like a comfy pair of slippers.
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the shit out
of
me, today, when one of the NFL commentators referred to RUGBY
mid-Broadcast today!!
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer to
Australian
Rules Football!!
Daniel70 wrote:
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
In American football, they do kick the ball, but it is not the
predominant method of moving the ball. IIRC, in some of its early incarnations, a successful field goal kick was worth more points than
other scoring attempts.
As the forward pass was not yet legal, it was more difficult to move
the ball, and there were many more punts and drop-kick attempts than
there are now.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the shit
out of me, today, when one of the NFL commentators referred to
RUGBY mid-Broadcast today!!
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer to
Australian Rules Football!!
Early American football was basically Rugby. I am surprised it got mentioned during an NFL game, though. Over time, the rules drifted
away from rugby until their similarities are not so obvious.
* SLMR 2.1a * Direct from the Ministry of Silly Walks--
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
In American football, they do kick the ball, but it is not the
predominant
method of moving the ball. IIRC, in some of its early incarnations, a >successful field goal kick was worth more points than other scoring
attempts.
As the forward pass was not yet legal, it was more difficult to move
the
ball, and there were many more punts and drop-kick attempts than there
are
now.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the shit out
of
me, today, when one of the NFL commentators referred to RUGBY
mid-Broadcast today!!
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer to
Australian
Rules Football!!
Early American football was basically Rugby. I am surprised it got
mentioned during an NFL game, though. Over time, the rules drifted
away
from rugby until their similarities are not so obvious.
* SLMR 2.1a * Direct from the Ministry of Silly Walks--
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
----
Daniel70
On 11/10/2025 10:27 am, Dumas Walker wrote:
1) It's not football if you don't kick the ball.
In American football, they do kick the ball, but it is not the
predominant method of moving the ball. IIRC, in some of its early
incarnations, a successful field goal kick was worth more points than
other scoring attempts.
That must have been when it WAS actually FOOTBALL!!
As the forward pass was not yet legal, it was more difficult to move
the ball, and there were many more punts and drop-kick attempts than
there are now.
Yeap, I can relate to that .... and it (almost) shocked the shit
out of me, today, when one of the NFL commentators referred to
RUGBY mid-Broadcast today!!
Who said Yanks were DUMB ..... but, well, he didn't refer to
Australian Rules Football!!
Early American football was basically Rugby. I am surprised it got
mentioned during an NFL game, though. Over time, the rules drifted
away from rugby until their similarities are not so obvious.
You can type THAT again!!
--* SLMR 2.1a * Direct from the Ministry of Silly Walks--
Daniel70
Hmmm!! Maybe, if you, Aggy, were to send The BBC a list of
those Episodes that you have on VHS .... they might send you
those Episodes on DVD and/or Blu-Ray .... or, maybe, they'll
send you a Link to their Secret storage trove .... MAYBE!!
At a guess I'd say they'd roll around the floor laughing at
that request... before composing a polite thank you response.
Actually, on a serious note... he should send them an e-mail
requesting upgrades for his VHS collection. It'd be interesting
to know what they would say.
I mean, what's the point in moaning here if you don't actually--
do something about it? (Don't ask, don't get.)
Actually, on a serious note... he should send them an e-mail
requesting upgrades for his VHS collection. It'd be interesting
to know what they would say.
He's done this once before.-a It was either complaining about something regarding show/script writing and how they did story/script commissions during RTD's first tenure as show runner...or just about RTD's first run
in general.
He then copied and pasted what he sent to the BBC here...and, true to
form, it read like a rant that a raving lunatic would have written; IOW...just like how he rants here.-a Never mentioned if he got a response back.
I could be any of the reasons listed...he was ranting on about them all
at the same time...and it was almost 20 years ago as well.
In article <10cg083$1daic$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
-aFrom what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
In article <10cg3bf$283k$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says... >>
In article <10cg083$1daic$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
I hadn't heard that before. That's interesting.
Melissa
On 10/12/2025 10:46, Hornplayer9599 wrote:
Actually, on a serious note... he should send them an e-mail
requesting upgrades for his VHS collection. It'd be interesting
to know what they would say.
He's done this once before.-a It was either complaining about something
regarding show/script writing and how they did story/script
commissions during RTD's first tenure as show runner...or just about
RTD's first run in general.
He then copied and pasted what he sent to the BBC here...and, true to
form, it read like a rant that a raving lunatic would have written;
IOW...just like how he rants here.-a Never mentioned if he got a
response back.
Now that I think about it, I might have the reason for his email wrong.
It may have been about his displeasure regarding the digital overlay
graphic (A.K.A. a "DOG" or "watermark") that channels put in the corner
of the screen.
In article <10cg3bf$283k$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says...
In article <10cg083$1daic$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
On 10/12/2025 05:34, Daniel70 wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
-aFrom what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
That's a new one on me.-a I enjoy Aussie Rules when I can find someone
who carries the games here in the US.-a ESPN used to so it way back when
the league was still the VFL.
On 13/10/2025 11:33 am, Hornplayer9599 wrote:
On 10/12/2025 05:34, Daniel70 wrote:VFL .... Yes, that *IS* a few years back!!
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
-aFrom what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
That's a new one on me.-a I enjoy Aussie Rules when I can find someone
who carries the games here in the US.-a ESPN used to so it way back
when the league was still the VFL.
Did you prefer one team over the rest??
On 13/10/2025 10:32 am, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10cg3bf$283k$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <10cg083$1daic$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70-a <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
-a From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
I call "BULLSHIT" on that, Binky, B U L L S H I T!!
Throwing a ball around with your *hands* keeps you fit for kicking a
ball around with your *feet* !!
B U L L S H I T !!
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a WINTER game in any case!!
Now that I think about it, I might have the reason for his
email wrong. It may have been about his displeasure regarding
the digital overlay graphic (A.K.A. a "DOG" or "watermark")
that channels put in the corner of the screen. He complained
that the DOGs were so large that in order for him to not be
distracted by them he had to put tin foil over his
monitor...when then made the viewing area so small he couldn't
watch the shows.
It could be any of the reasons listed...he was ranting on about
them all at the same time...and it was almost 20 years ago as
well.
On 13/10/2025 10:32 am, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10cg3bf$283k$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says...
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit
in the winter.
I call "BULLSHIT" on that, Binky, B U L L S H I T!!
Throwing a ball around with your hands keeps you fit
for kicking a ball around with your feet !!
B U L L S H I T !!
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
On 13/10/2025 7:35 am, Hornplayer9599 wrote:
On 10/12/2025 10:46, Hornplayer9599 wrote:
Actually, on a serious note... he should send them an e-mail
requesting upgrades for his VHS collection. It'd be interesting
to know what they would say.
He's done this once before.-a It was either complaining about something >>> regarding show/script writing and how they did story/script
commissions during RTD's first tenure as show runner...or just about
RTD's first run in general.
He then copied and pasted what he sent to the BBC here...and, true to
form, it read like a rant that a raving lunatic would have written;
IOW...just like how he rants here.-a Never mentioned if he got a
response back.
Now that I think about it, I might have the reason for his email wrong.
It may have been about his displeasure regarding the digital overlay
graphic (A.K.A. a "DOG" or "watermark") that channels put in the corner
of the screen.
"DOG" ... "digital overlay graphic" .... Can't say that I've ever heard
of that terminology .... but I know EXACTLY what you mean!! ;-P
----
Daniel70
On 13/10/2025 10:32 am, The True Melissa wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
In article <10cg3bf$283k$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says...
In article <10cg083$1daic$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
I call "BULL*" on that, Binky, B U L L *!!
Throwing a ball around with your *hands* keeps you fit for kicking a
ball around with your *feet* !!
B U L L *!!
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a WINTER game in any >case!!
----
Daniel70
On 10/13/2025 04:38, Daniel70 wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
On 13/10/2025 10:32 am, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10cg3bf$283k$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>, doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
says...
In article <10cg083$1daic$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70-a <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:33 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:;-P
On 11/10/2025 2:01 am, Blueshirt wrote:
If you want to call your sport football... kick the
fucking ball!
We kick the Ball in Australian Rules FOOTball .... maybe
not as often as in Soccer (or do you actually call that
Football??), but still we kick the ball FAIRLY often.
100 times in a (100 minute) game maybe.
-a From what I have seen of Aussie Rules there's more punching
of people than kicking a ball!!!
Weird how Aussie Rules was originally meant to be just a means of
keeping Cricket Players fit during the Winter.
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
I call "BULL*" on that, Binky, B U L L *!!
Throwing a ball around with your *hands* keeps you fit for kicking a
ball around with your *feet* !!
B U L L *!!
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a WINTER game in any
case!!
James Naismith created basketball simply to keep his students physically >active on rainy days, and in the wintertime. They *did* use a soccer
ball at first before developing an actual basketball.
----
Intelligence is no guarantee against being dead wrong.
--Carl Sagan
Daniel70 wrote:^^^^^<-PAedophile talker noted
On 13/10/2025 10:32 am, The True Melissa wrote:
In article <10cg3bf$283k$4@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca says...
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit
in the winter.
I call "BULL*" on that, Binky, B U L L *!!
Strangely enough, it's not!
Keeping people fit during the winter was exactly why
Basketball was invented.
Throwing a ball around with your hands keeps you fit
for kicking a ball around with your feet !!
B U L L * !!
RADW seems to be more educational than school. Who'd have
thought it eh?
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
Football/Soccer is played all year round nowadays.
Early American football was basically Rugby. I am surprised it got mentioned during an NFL game, though. Over time, the rules drifted
away from rugby until their similarities are not so obvious.
You can type THAT again!!
On 13/10/2025 10:32 am, The True Melissa wrote:<CHOP>
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
I call "BULLSHIT" on that, Binky, B U L L S H I T!!
Throwing a ball around with your *hands* keeps you fit for kicking a
ball around with your *feet* !!
B U L L S H I T !!
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a WINTER game in any case!!
Early American football was basically Rugby. I am surprised it got
mentioned during an NFL game, though. Over time, the rules drifted
away from rugby until their similarities are not so obvious.
You can type THAT again!!
The rules drifted away because fans got tired of low-scoring and tie
games.
Only the rugby purists were upset with the change.
IMHO, that first sentence is also why it has taken/is taking so long
for
soccer to catch on in the states.
* SLMR 2.1a * On a clear disk you can seek forever
Hornplayer9599 wrote:
Now that I think about it, I might have the reason for his
email wrong. It may have been about his displeasure regarding
the digital overlay graphic (A.K.A. a "DOG" or "watermark")
that channels put in the corner of the screen. He complained
that the DOGs were so large that in order for him to not be
distracted by them he had to put tin foil over his
monitor...when then made the viewing area so small he couldn't
watch the shows.
Yeah, I remember the DOG thing...
It could be any of the reasons listed...he was ranting on about
them all at the same time...and it was almost 20 years ago as
well.
No point in anyone ranting here unless they are going to send
an e-mail to the people responsible for their gripes. By all
means let us know what they say in reply then...
I'd love to know what the BBC would say to somebody requesting
they upgrade their old Doctor Who VHS tapes with shiny new
Blu-Ray versions of those stories. Go for it AGA!
On 13/10/2025 11:12 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Hornplayer9599 wrote:
Now that I think about it, I might have the reason for his
email wrong. It may have been about his displeasure regarding
the digital overlay graphic (A.K.A. a "DOG" or "watermark")
that channels put in the corner of the screen. He complained
that the DOGs were so large that in order for him to not be
distracted by them he had to put tin foil over his
monitor...when then made the viewing area so small he couldn't
watch the shows.
Yeah, I remember the DOG thing...
It could be any of the reasons listed...he was ranting on about
them all at the same time...and it was almost 20 years ago as
well.
No point in anyone ranting here unless they are going to send
an e-mail to the people responsible for their gripes. By all
means let us know what they say in reply then...
Maybe he was trying to drum up some support, here, so he wouldn't look
like such a loser .... er, I mean such a Loner!!
--I'd love to know what the BBC would say to somebody requesting--
they upgrade their old Doctor Who VHS tapes with shiny new
Blu-Ray versions of those stories. Go for it AGA!
Daniel70
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
I hadn't heard that before. That's interesting.
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a WINTER game in
any
case!!
Throwing a ball around with your *hands* keeps you fit for kicking a
ball around with your *feet* !!
B U L L *!!
Check the history Dannyboy.
On 13/10/2025 11:12 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Hornplayer9599 wrote:
It could be any of the reasons listed...he was ranting
on about them all at the same time...and it was almost
20 years ago as well.
No point in anyone ranting here unless they are going to
send an e-mail to the people responsible for their gripes.
By all means let us know what they say in reply then...
Maybe he was trying to drum up some support, here, so he
wouldn't look like such a loser ....
er, I mean such a Loner!!
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a
fall or spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in
the winter.
I hadn't heard that before. That's interesting.
As basketball was created in the states (although by a
Canadian), I doubt it had any relation to soccer as
soccer would not have been that popular here in the 1890s.
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in the winter.
I hadn't heard that before. That's interesting.
As basketball was created in the states (although by a Canadian), I
doubt
it had any relation to soccer as soccer would not have been that
popular
here in the 1890s.
* SLMR 2.1a * Lye, Cheetham, and Steele: Attorneys at Law--
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a WINTER game in
any
case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a fall or
spring
sport. Basketball is the winter game.
* SLMR 2.1a * A message from Dewey, Cheatham and Howe, PC
Throwing a ball around with your *hands* keeps you fit for kicking a
ball around with your *feet* !!
B U L L *!!
Check the history Dannyboy.
The history actually says it was created as a less injury prone
alternative
to North American football. Best as I can tell, the only direct
relationship to soccer is that they apparently initially used a soccer
ball
until they created a "basketball," which would make more sense than
using
an oblong football or rugbyball, which would be difficult to dribble.
;)
In school in the 1970's, we played most of our sports using a "general >purpose" ball. So, basketball, soccer, and volleyball were played with
the
same kind of ball one would associate with dodgeball or kickball but,
aside
from being played with a round ball, I wouldn't call those sports
related. ;)
* SLMR 2.1a * 53.7% of all statistics are totally incorrect--
Daniel70 wrote:
On 13/10/2025 11:12 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Hornplayer9599 wrote:
It could be any of the reasons listed...he was ranting
on about them all at the same time...and it was almost
20 years ago as well.
No point in anyone ranting here unless they are going to
send an e-mail to the people responsible for their gripes.
By all means let us know what they say in reply then...
Maybe he was trying to drum up some support, here, so he
wouldn't look like such a loser ....
Well, if Agamemnon's cause was one we all shared I'm sure we
would happily support him. We're not Philistines are we?
That's why I would be interested to know what the BBC would
actually say about upgrading people's VHS tapes to more modern
equivalents... as if they agreed with AGA's point of view and
gave him free upgrades, I could support my mate and also send
the BBC an e-mail! :-)
er, I mean such a Loner!!
Nobody should be lonesome here. We are here for each other,
remember!
Dumas Walker wrote:
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a
fall or spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Discussing 'seasons' on RADW - which has regulars from all over
the world - can get confusing at times. I mean, we have some
people here who seem to think that July is in the middle of
Winter!!! (I know, I know... but we have to humour them.)
Dumas Walker wrote:
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in
the winter.
I hadn't heard that before. That's interesting.
As basketball was created in the states (although by a
Canadian), I doubt it had any relation to soccer as
soccer would not have been that popular here in the 1890s.
Well, as they [supposedly] used a soccer ball originally means
somebody at that school must have been playing soccer over
there... (I would imagine the British brought early versions
of soccer over to North America with them.)
I wasn't around though, so it's only hearsay...
Dumas Walker wrote:
Just like basketball was to keep soccer players fit in
the winter.
I hadn't heard that before. That's interesting.
As basketball was created in the states (although by a
Canadian), I doubt it had any relation to soccer as
soccer would not have been that popular here in the 1890s.
Well, as they [supposedly] used a soccer ball originally means
somebody at that school must have been playing soccer over
there... (I would imagine the British brought early versions
of soccer over to North America with them.)
I wasn't around though, so it's only hearsay...
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a WINTER game
in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a fall or
spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
* SLMR 2.1a * A message from Dewey, Cheatham and Howe, PC
Dumas Walker wrote:
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a
fall or spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Discussing 'seasons' on RADW - which has regulars from all over
the world - can get confusing at times. I mean, we have some
people here who seem to think that July is in the middle of
Winter!!! (I know, I know... but we have to humour them.)
On 14/10/2025 9:13 am, Dumas Walker wrote:
Ah!! O.K., then. Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer had, more orAnd, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a WINTER game
in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a fall or
spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
* SLMR 2.1a * A message from Dewey, Cheatham and Howe, PC
less, given up as a Winter sport and was being played in our Summer.
----
Daniel70
On 15/10/2025 6:32 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Humour ME, will you?!?!
Dumas Walker wrote:
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a
fall or spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Discussing 'seasons' on RADW - which has regulars from all over
the world - can get confusing at times. I mean, we have some
people here who seem to think that July is in the middle of
Winter!!! (I know, I know... but we have to humour them.)
----
Daniel70
Throwing a ball around with your *hands* keeps you fit for
kicking a ball around with your *feet* !!
B U L L *!!
Check the history Dannyboy.
The history actually says it was created as a less injury prone
alternative to North American football.
Best as I can tell, the only direct relationship to soccer is that
they apparently initially used a soccer ball until they created a "basketball," which would make more sense than using an oblong
football or rugbyball, which would be difficult to dribble. ;)
In school in the 1970's, we played most of our sports using a
"general purpose" ball. So, basketball, soccer, and volleyball were
played with the same kind of ball one would associate with dodgeball
or kickball but, aside from being played with a round ball, I
wouldn't call those sports related. ;)
* SLMR 2.1a * 53.7% of all statistics are totally incorrect
Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer had, more or
less, given up as a Winter sport and was being played
in our Summer.
On 15/10/2025 6:32 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Dumas Walker wrote:
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a
fall or spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Discussing 'seasons' on RADW - which has regulars from all
over the world - can get confusing at times. I mean, we have
some people here who seem to think that July is in the
middle of Winter!!! (I know, I know... but we have to humour
them.)
Humour ME, will you?!?!
On 2025-10-14 1:39 p.m., Blueshirt wrote:
Dumas Walker wrote:
As basketball was created in the states (although by a
Canadian), I doubt it had any relation to soccer as
soccer would not have been that popular here in the 1890s.
Well, as they [supposedly] used a soccer ball originally
means somebody at that school must have been playing soccer
over there... (I would imagine the British brought early
versions of soccer over to North America with them.)
I wasn't around though, so it's only hearsay...
Of course the one who made this foolish claim could post a
link to actually proof to support his nonsense.
In article <10co25q$3kpuj$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Ah!! O.K., then. Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer
had, more or less, given up as a Winter sport and was being
played in our Summer.
Australia's summer is British Winter.
On 14/10/2025 9:13 am, Dumas Walker wrote:
The history actually says it was created as a less
injury prone alternative to North American football.
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative for
GridIron!!
On 14/10/2025 9:13 am, Dumas Walker wrote:
Throwing a ball around with your *hands* keeps you fit for
kicking a ball around with your *feet* !!
B U L L *!!
Check the history Dannyboy.
The history actually says it was created as a less injury prone
alternative to North American football.
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative for GridIron!! No
Way. Well, maybe in the U.S. of A., but I reckon Soccer/Football was
being played in Europe/U.K. waaaaaayy before Grid Iron begani.
--Best as I can tell, the only direct relationship to soccer is that--
they apparently initially used a soccer ball until they created a
"basketball," which would make more sense than using an oblong
football or rugbyball, which would be difficult to dribble. ;)
In school in the 1970's, we played most of our sports using a
"general purpose" ball. So, basketball, soccer, and volleyball were
played with the same kind of ball one would associate with dodgeball
or kickball but, aside from being played with a round ball, I
wouldn't call those sports related. ;)
* SLMR 2.1a * 53.7% of all statistics are totally incorrect
Daniel70
Daniel70 wrote:
Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer had, more or
less, given up as a Winter sport and was being played
in our Summer.
Australia and Soccer are not two things I'd automatically link
together if we were talking about sports...
I know ye gave the footballing world Ange Postecoglou, but
despite his Aussie accent and going around calling everyone
"mate", he was born in Europe. So stick to the Cricket and
Rugby - it's what you are all good at!
Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/10/2025 6:32 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Humour ME, will you?!?!
Dumas Walker wrote:
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a
fall or spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Discussing 'seasons' on RADW - which has regulars from all
over the world - can get confusing at times. I mean, we have
some people here who seem to think that July is in the
middle of Winter!!! (I know, I know... but we have to humour
them.)
We do. Always!!!
;-)
Idlehands wrote:
On 2025-10-14 1:39 p.m., Blueshirt wrote:
Dumas Walker wrote:
As basketball was created in the states (although by a
Canadian), I doubt it had any relation to soccer as
soccer would not have been that popular here in the 1890s.
Well, as they [supposedly] used a soccer ball originally
means somebody at that school must have been playing soccer
over there... (I would imagine the British brought early
versions of soccer over to North America with them.)
I wasn't around though, so it's only hearsay...
Of course the one who made this foolish claim could post a
link to actually proof to support his nonsense.
It is well documented that some sports teacher in North America
invented [what became] Basketball by using a round leather ball
in his gym to keep his PE students active when they couldn't go
outside in the harsh winter. That is supposedly where/how the
game originated. So Dave was actually close enough, for once!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <10co25q$3kpuj$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Ah!! O.K., then. Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer
had, more or less, given up as a Winter sport and was being
played in our Summer.
Australia's summer is British Winter.
Really Dave?! I'm sure Daniel, living in Australia, didn't
know that!
You are the font of all knowledge... how would we ever manage
without you?
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/10/2025 9:13 am, Dumas Walker wrote:
The history actually says it was created as a less
injury prone alternative to North American football.
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative for
GridIron!!
It was the other way around: American and Canadian "football"
evolved from the early versions of [what became] soccer and
Rugby. Those sports what not the defined/organised versions
that we have today, as local rules ball games had been around
for centuries.
In article <10co329$3l2lv$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative
for GridIron!! No Way. Well, maybe in the U.S. of A.,
but I reckon Soccer/Football was being played in Europe/U.K.
waaaaaayy before Grid Iron began.
All right!
football Started in England.
So did Rugby in Kenilworth!
In article <xn0pc2nhc14w3n002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer had, more or
less, given up as a Winter sport and was being played
in our Summer.
Australia and Soccer are not two things I'd automatically
link together if we were talking about sports...
Canada 0 Aus 1 recently :-(
In article <xn0pc2nuf1nw3c006@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Australia's summer is British Winter.
Really Dave?! I'm sure Daniel, living in Australia, didn't
know that!
You are the font of all knowledge... how would we ever manage
without you?
WE must be doing a good job of humouring Daniel.
In article <xn0pc2o1v1ylrw007@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/10/2025 9:13 am, Dumas Walker wrote:
The history actually says it was created as a less
injury prone alternative to North American football.
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative for
GridIron!!
It was the other way around: American and Canadian "football"
evolved from the early versions of [what became] soccer and
Rugby. Those sports what not the defined/organised versions
that we have today, as local rules ball games had been
around for centuries.
Correct and do not forget Aus and NZ.
Go flames please.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <10co329$3l2lv$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative
for GridIron!! No Way. Well, maybe in the U.S. of A.,
but I reckon Soccer/Football was being played in Europe/U.K.
waaaaaayy before Grid Iron began.
All right!
football Started in England.
So did Rugby in Kenilworth!
I think you'll find that Rugby started in Rugby!
As in, at the Rugby public school, which is located in a
town called... (wait for it) ... Rugby.
The clue is in the name!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pc2nhc14w3n002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer had, more or
less, given up as a Winter sport and was being played
in our Summer.
Australia and Soccer are not two things I'd automatically
link together if we were talking about sports...
Canada 0 Aus 1 recently :-(
Yeah, but Canada is not really renowned around the world for
its soccer either...
I'm sure if Team Canada played Australia at Ice Hockey you'd
have your revenge!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pc2nuf1nw3c006@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Australia's summer is British Winter.
Really Dave?! I'm sure Daniel, living in Australia, didn't
know that!
You are the font of all knowledge... how would we ever manage
without you?
WE must be doing a good job of humouring Daniel.
He pops in most days so he must like us!
:-)
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pc2o1v1ylrw007@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/10/2025 9:13 am, Dumas Walker wrote:
The history actually says it was created as a less
injury prone alternative to North American football.
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative for
GridIron!!
It was the other way around: American and Canadian "football"
evolved from the early versions of [what became] soccer and
Rugby. Those sports what not the defined/organised versions
that we have today, as local rules ball games had been
around for centuries.
Correct and do not forget Aus and NZ.
Anybody who eats seafood salads or has BBQ's on the beach at
Christmas deserves to be forgotten about...
The Doctor wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
Go flames please.
WTF, Binky?
As basketball was created in the states (although by a Canadian), I
doubt
it had any relation to soccer as soccer would not have been that
popular
here in the 1890s.
When was football popular in the USA?
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a
fall or spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Discussing 'seasons' on RADW - which has regulars from all over
the world - can get confusing at times. I mean, we have some
people here who seem to think that July is in the middle of
Winter!!! (I know, I know... but we have to humour them.)
In article <186eb4c8956a4556$4741$3076111$60dd6a6a@news.thecubenet.com>,
Rudy Canoza <rudy.can@jllkone.not> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Go flames please.WTF, Binky?
https://postimg.cc/dDNWbWSg <-Paedophile
Daniel70 wrote:
Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer had, more or
less, given up as a Winter sport and was being played
in our Summer.
Australia and Soccer are not two things I'd automatically link
together if we were talking about sports...
I know ye gave the footballing world Ange Postecoglou, but
despite his Aussie accent and going around calling everyone
"mate", he was born in Europe. So stick to the Cricket and
Rugby - it's what you are all good at!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <10co25q$3kpuj$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Ah!! O.K., then. Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer
had, more or less, given up as a Winter sport and was being
played in our Summer.
Australia's summer is British Winter.
Really Dave?! I'm sure Daniel, living in Australia, didn't
know that!
You are the font of all knowledge... how would we ever manage
without you?
The Doctor wrote:
In article <10co329$3l2lv$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative
for GridIron!! No Way. Well, maybe in the U.S. of A.,
but I reckon Soccer/Football was being played in Europe/U.K.
waaaaaayy before Grid Iron began.
All right!
football Started in England.
So did Rugby in Kenilworth!
I think you'll find that Rugby started in Rugby!
As in, at the Rugby public school, which is located in a
town called... (wait for it) ... Rugby.
The clue is in the name!
As basketball was created in the states (although by a Canadian), I
doubt
it had any relation to soccer as soccer would not have been that
popular
here in the 1890s.
When was football popular in the USA?
North American - for as long as I can remember (50+ years)
"Soccer" - it is gaining in popularity, mostly thanks to some successes
of the
women's olympic teams.
* SLMR 2.1a * Remember when safe sex was not getting caught in the--
act?
And, correct me if I'm wrong .... but isn't Soccer a
WINTER game in any case!!
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a
fall or spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Discussing 'seasons' on RADW - which has regulars from all over
the world - can get confusing at times. I mean, we have some
people here who seem to think that July is in the middle of
Winter!!! (I know, I know... but we have to humour them.)
LOL, I wasn't thinking about folks who live "down under." Poor
judgement
on my part! My apologies to anyone I might have offended by my
Northern
Hemisphere-centric opinion. :D :D :D
* SLMR 2.1a * Basic Flying Rule #1: Keep the pointy end forward.--
The Binky Doctor wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
^^^^^<-Paedophile talker notedIn article <186eb4c8956a4556$4741$3076111$60dd6a6a@news.thecubenet.com>,
Friend of Jeffery Epstein and Peadophile Rudy Canoza <rudy.can@jllkone.not> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Go flames please.WTF, Binky?
https://postimg.cc/dDNWbWSg <-Paedophile
Stay away from the kiddies, lardass.
On 16/10/2025 12:27 am, Blueshirt wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer had, more or
less, given up as a Winter sport and was being played
in our Summer.
Australia and Soccer are not two things I'd automatically link
together if we were talking about sports...
Post WWII, a lot of people wanted to get as far as they could from
Europe .... and WE had all this 'empty' land that we wanted to populate
... so lots of 'former' Europeans made their way out here.
Never heard of the term "Ten Pound Poms"??
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Pound_Poms
Similar schemes operated through out Europe, too.
--I know ye gave the footballing world Ange Postecoglou, but
despite his Aussie accent and going around calling everyone
"mate", he was born in Europe. So stick to the Cricket and
Rugby - it's what you are all good at!
And the webpage I've listed above also refers to other "Australians", too.
--
Daniel70
On 16/10/2025 12:41 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:.... but PLEASE, oh, PLEASE, can we try??
In article <10co25q$3kpuj$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Ah!! O.K., then. Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer
had, more or less, given up as a Winter sport and was being
played in our Summer.
Australia's summer is British Winter.
Really Dave?! I'm sure Daniel, living in Australia, didn't
know that!
You are the font of all knowledge... how would we ever manage
without you?
----
Daniel70
On 16/10/2025 1:12 am, Blueshirt wrote:^^^^^<-Paedophile talker noted
The Doctor wrote:
In article <10co329$3l2lv$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Sorry. WHAT?? You think Soccer began as an alternative
for GridIron!! No Way. Well, maybe in the U.S. of A.,
but I reckon Soccer/Football was being played in Europe/U.K.
waaaaaayy before Grid Iron began.
All right!
football Started in England.
So did Rugby in Kenilworth!
I think you'll find that Rugby started in Rugby!
As in, at the Rugby public school, which is located in a
town called... (wait for it) ... Rugby.
The clue is in the name!
Hmm! I was gunna ask Binky "Where is Kenilworth??" but your
providing the FACTS (which even I knew) sort of makes that superfluous,
now. ;-)
----
Daniel70
In article <xn0pc2opc2rgms00a@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
football Started in England.
So did Rugby in Kenilworth!
I think you'll find that Rugby started in Rugby!
As in, at the Rugby public school, which is located in a
town called... (wait for it) ... Rugby.
The clue is in the name!
Rugby is located in Kenilworth.
Post WWII, a lot of people wanted to get as far as they
could from Europe .... and WE had all this 'empty' land
that we wanted to populate ... so lots of 'former' Europeans
made their way out here.
Never heard of the term "Ten Pound Poms"??
On 16/10/2025 12:41 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Australia's summer is British Winter.
Really Dave?! I'm sure Daniel, living in Australia, didn't
know that!
You are the font of all knowledge... how would we ever manage
without you?
.... but PLEASE, oh, PLEASE, can we try??
In article <10cqdmb$9jph$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 16/10/2025 12:41 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:.... but PLEASE, oh, PLEASE, can we try??
Australia's summer is British Winter.
Really Dave?! I'm sure Daniel, living in Australia,
didn't know that!
You are the font of all knowledge... how would we ever
manage >> without you?
We all do,
Never heard of county Kenilworth there Dannyboy?
?
Discussing 'seasons' on RADW - which has regulars from all
over the world - can get confusing at times. I mean, we have
some people here who seem to think that July is in the
middle of Winter!!! (I know, I know... but we have to humour
them.)
LOL, I wasn't thinking about folks who live "down under."
Poor judgement on my part! My apologies to anyone I might
have offended by my Northern Hemisphere-centric opinion. :D
:D :D
In the states, soccer (at least the outdoor variety) is a fall or
spring sport. Basketball is the winter game.
Ah!! O.K., then. Last I looked, here in Australia, Soccer had, more
or
less, given up as a Winter sport and was being played in our Summer.