Comments on: Entertainment industry? Heads in sand? Still? Surely not. http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/ Blogging in the real world Sun, 12 Feb 2012 23:44:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Ordder Checks Online http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-175327 Ordder Checks Online Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:53:13 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-175327 <strong>Ordder Checks Online...</strong> I've been looking a long time for a blog like this one, and now my questions needed answering for so long have been dealt with here at (Entertainment industry? Heads in sand? Still? Surely not ...). great! Kind regards, Betty Ann Carter... Ordder Checks Online…

I’ve been looking a long time for a blog like this one, and now my questions needed answering for so long have been dealt with here at (Entertainment industry? Heads in sand? Still? Surely not …). great! Kind regards, Betty Ann Carter…

]]> By: Minou http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-28887 Minou Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:36:09 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-28887 Thank goodness I decided to check back and see if you had 'had a go' - of course you did. I am professional in what I do, I'm actually very good at it. I'm sure you are expect in your work with computers, otherwise you would not be a contributing editor on the magazine. This forum is nothing to do with my work, nor with my employers. My opinions are not theirs, they are my own. I and many others expect impartiality from the staff of the magazine regarding reviews etc. That level of impartiality is not expected from the other posters - you and your colleagues are the only journalists posting on this forum. I hope you feel proud that you have provoked such base emotions - one of my points (which you choose, repeatedly, to ignore was that the arousal of such 'base emotions' was perhaps the point of this article. I don't believe that I have sneered at anyone, not even at you - I have forthrightly expressed a personal opinion. Not and unemotive one admittedly, but one that you drew upon yourself. My opinion of you remains unchanged as, no doubt, does you opinion of me. Feel free to have the last word, I'll not be responding to you as you choose to ignore any points made that don't suit you. Have a nice day. Thank goodness I decided to check back and see if you had ‘had a go’ – of course you did. I am professional in what I do, I’m actually very good at it. I’m sure you are expect in your work with computers, otherwise you would not be a contributing editor on the magazine. This forum is nothing to do with my work, nor with my employers. My opinions are not theirs, they are my own. I and many others expect impartiality from the staff of the magazine regarding reviews etc. That level of impartiality is not expected from the other posters – you and your colleagues are the only journalists posting on this forum. I hope you feel proud that you have provoked such base emotions – one of my points (which you choose, repeatedly, to ignore was that the arousal of such ‘base emotions’ was perhaps the point of this article. I don’t believe that I have sneered at anyone, not even at you – I have forthrightly expressed a personal opinion. Not and unemotive one admittedly, but one that you drew upon yourself. My opinion of you remains unchanged as, no doubt, does you opinion of me. Feel free to have the last word, I’ll not be responding to you as you choose to ignore any points made that don’t suit you. Have a nice day.

]]> By: Steve Cassidy http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-27877 Steve Cassidy Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:48:42 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-27877 Ah I see the rules of the game now. We are expected to sit and listen to responses like yours and take them, because we are alternately "professionals" when we are obliged to sit and listen, and then "unprofessional" when we write something. You on the other hand can use any word that suits you, because you've been slighted on a personal level by a passing reference to an ephemeral piece of entertainment, and that puts you in the right, even when you are defending copyright thieves. How you have the sheer brass neck to talk about "base emotions" being associated with The Sun, and then go on to so manifestly fail to understand, much less control, your own, beggars belief. You really do want (and indeed, deserve) nothing more substantiative than the JK show. You can't even understand what an editorial policy is, or how it manifests itself here: what "caused the important subject to be lost" as you so pompously assert, was the team commitment here not to exercise the powers we have to edit, remove, rewrite or otherwise mess with posts in the blog system. Out of the 90-plus comments made here, I can tell you: only one has been held back. You and your friends here were left free to express yourselves: and the best you can do given that freedom is posture, sneer and use bad words. I'm not sure there's a handy short anglo-saxon word for what you are doing here, to leave as an archetypal parting shot: but don't pretend that this is all about good manners and then leave yours out of the equation. That would make you a hypocrite. Ah I see the rules of the game now. We are expected to sit and listen to responses like yours and take them, because we are alternately “professionals” when we are obliged to sit and listen, and then “unprofessional” when we write something. You on the other hand can use any word that suits you, because you’ve been slighted on a personal level by a passing reference to an ephemeral piece of entertainment, and that puts you in the right, even when you are defending copyright thieves.

How you have the sheer brass neck to talk about “base emotions” being associated with The Sun, and then go on to so manifestly fail to understand, much less control, your own, beggars belief. You really do want (and indeed, deserve) nothing more substantiative than the JK show. You can’t even understand what an editorial policy is, or how it manifests itself here: what “caused the important subject to be lost” as you so pompously assert, was the team commitment here not to exercise the powers we have to edit, remove, rewrite or otherwise mess with posts in the blog system. Out of the 90-plus comments made here, I can tell you: only one has been held back. You and your friends here were left free to express yourselves: and the best you can do given that freedom is posture, sneer and use bad words.

I’m not sure there’s a handy short anglo-saxon word for what you are doing here, to leave as an archetypal parting shot: but don’t pretend that this is all about good manners and then leave yours out of the equation. That would make you a hypocrite.

]]> By: Minou http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-27068 Minou Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:11:00 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-27068 Steve - to deal with your points 1 by 1... 1) " Mack, you seem to imagine this blog site is outside the system run by Tim, Barry et al. What evidence do you have for that assumption?" It appears self evident that there is no editorial control over what is posted by contributing editors/columnists (like yourself) - even in the magazine your opinions are yours, not the official word of the publishers. As for staff, if there is an editorial control system in place it has failed in this case - unless the purpose of the posting was to create controversyand get some cheap publicity - a point I have made before in this thread and which has not been answered. 2) "I don’t see an iota of impartiality in your contribution: " I have made no claim of impartiality. As a reader and a poster to the forum I am not bound to be impartial. As a journalist and a representative of your employers I expect impartiality from David Bayon and, to a lesser extent, from you. I make no apology for that. to repeat "A little respect for the opinions of others wouldn’t go amiss, and a return to a more lofty standard of journalism than shown recently would be welcome." 3) "There are some big subjects here - both in the original comment, which I grow more inclined to back up with every attempt to blacken it, by people with motives like yours - and in this thread" There was a big subject here - the reasons for the popularity of P2P downloading of publicly broadcast television shows. The fact that your colleague chose to attach such emotive opinion to his statements - "Stargate Atlantis is rubbish. This is a fact. This one single photo should tell you just how rubbish it is, but if it doesn’t, well, let me tell you: It’s rubbish. Really." - caused that big subject to be lost. In my opinion this is either poor, inexperienced and naive journalism or a cynical attempt to boost the number of comments made on the blog using methods more commonly found in the Sun. I hope it proves to be the former - experience comes with time while few escape the base emotions of publications like the Sun and its ilk. 4) "preferably without turning this into the Jeremy Kyle show… thanks for your help on that score, by the way." I do so hope you have read this far Steve. Your colleague David created this monster, you came along and added fuel to the flames. Your abrasive manner - totally unnecessary - in defence of your colleague, certainly didn't help. On the basis of the evidence I conclude that David lacks experience ( I'd say he's gained some over this thread) and that you are a shit. i know its not impartial, but that is my opinion. Steve – to deal with your points 1 by 1…
1) ” Mack, you seem to imagine this blog site is outside the system run by Tim, Barry et al. What evidence do you have for that assumption?”
It appears self evident that there is no editorial control over what is posted by contributing editors/columnists (like yourself) – even in the magazine your opinions are yours, not the official word of the publishers. As for staff, if there is an editorial control system in place it has failed in this case – unless the purpose of the posting was to create controversyand get some cheap publicity – a point I have made before in this thread and which has not been answered.
2) “I don’t see an iota of impartiality in your contribution: ”
I have made no claim of impartiality. As a reader and a poster to the forum I am not bound to be impartial. As a journalist and a representative of your employers I expect impartiality from David Bayon and, to a lesser extent, from you. I make no apology for that. to repeat “A little respect for the opinions of others wouldn’t go amiss, and a return to a more lofty standard of journalism than shown recently would be welcome.”
3) “There are some big subjects here – both in the original comment, which I grow more inclined to back up with every attempt to blacken it, by people with motives like yours – and in this thread”
There was a big subject here – the reasons for the popularity of P2P downloading of publicly broadcast television shows. The fact that your colleague chose to attach such emotive opinion to his statements – “Stargate Atlantis is rubbish. This is a fact. This one single photo should tell you just how rubbish it is, but if it doesn’t, well, let me tell you: It’s rubbish. Really.” – caused that big subject to be lost. In my opinion this is either poor, inexperienced and naive journalism or a cynical attempt to boost the number of comments made on the blog using methods more commonly found in the Sun. I hope it proves to be the former – experience comes with time while few escape the base emotions of publications like the Sun and its ilk.
4) “preferably without turning this into the Jeremy Kyle show… thanks for your help on that score, by the way.”
I do so hope you have read this far Steve. Your colleague David created this monster, you came along and added fuel to the flames. Your abrasive manner – totally unnecessary – in defence of your colleague, certainly didn’t help. On the basis of the evidence I conclude that David lacks experience ( I’d say he’s gained some over this thread) and that you are a shit. i know its not impartial, but that is my opinion.

]]> By: Arne http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-24363 Arne Sun, 04 Jan 2009 13:18:29 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-24363 I just logged on here, hoping someone would just respond to my thoughts in my second comment, yet it only turns out that SM made the only on-topic reply after I did. Ok, I also did respond in a rather overheated way. But now I regret that, as I, just like many others, overreacted (yet, I don't know why, I like BSG and NCIS, not such a fan of StarGate :/). So David: my appologies. Yes, I also think he made a mistake, but (as cliché as it can get) that's what makes us human. But instead of asking why it happened, most of the repliers here (including me) just went bezerk. David on the other hand, explained himself as soon as he saw all the reactions and he said he was sorry! What more can you possibly want? That you get repayed for all the emotional damage and lost time? So can we PLEASE stop the bitching (like this post :P) and talk about the REAL subject, wich is a rather good one: Why do people download so much and what can studios do against it. SM is right. Money again is a good reason. Why should people pay for a show, if they can easily download it for free, watch it whereever and whenever they want? But as I already said, local stations also have a fair amount of responsibility. If they show it years later or just don't show it, people have no legal way of seeing it (and if they do, it usually costs them, and in that case, SM's reason again takes place). Found another example (I like examples): A year (or two) ago, they showed the first season of BSG over here, but because it didn't turn out as good as they wanted to (probably because midnight isn't such a good moment to try a new show), they stopped broadcasting it. People like me, who did like it, are then left in the dark. The only way for us to even see the rest of the show, is by either buying the dvdbox (if they even sell that over here) or download it. I actually prefer to go with the free option instead of paying a lot for something I probably will only watch once. Paying ofcourse supports the show and I would buy dvd's if I really really really like the show (e.g. I like Top Gear even more, so I buy the dvd's, I don't even download it (mainly because my bandwidth limit doesn't allow me to download 12 season :P)) but i'm not such a fan of BSG that I would pay for the show wich will only show another 10 episodes and then end forgood... I hope others will take the effort of reading this (actually rather long) comment and talk about this instead of David using a word wrongly, even if he said he was sorry! I just logged on here, hoping someone would just respond to my thoughts in my second comment, yet it only turns out that SM made the only on-topic reply after I did.
Ok, I also did respond in a rather overheated way. But now I regret that, as I, just like many others, overreacted (yet, I don’t know why, I like BSG and NCIS, not such a fan of StarGate :/).
So David: my appologies.
Yes, I also think he made a mistake, but (as cliché as it can get) that’s what makes us human. But instead of asking why it happened, most of the repliers here (including me) just went bezerk.

David on the other hand, explained himself as soon as he saw all the reactions and he said he was sorry!
What more can you possibly want? That you get repayed for all the emotional damage and lost time?

So can we PLEASE stop the bitching (like this post :P ) and talk about the REAL subject, wich is a rather good one: Why do people download so much and what can studios do against it.

SM is right. Money again is a good reason. Why should people pay for a show, if they can easily download it for free, watch it whereever and whenever they want?
But as I already said, local stations also have a fair amount of responsibility. If they show it years later or just don’t show it, people have no legal way of seeing it (and if they do, it usually costs them, and in that case, SM’s reason again takes place).
Found another example (I like examples): A year (or two) ago, they showed the first season of BSG over here, but because it didn’t turn out as good as they wanted to (probably because midnight isn’t such a good moment to try a new show), they stopped broadcasting it. People like me, who did like it, are then left in the dark. The only way for us to even see the rest of the show, is by either buying the dvdbox (if they even sell that over here) or download it. I actually prefer to go with the free option instead of paying a lot for something I probably will only watch once.
Paying ofcourse supports the show and I would buy dvd’s if I really really really like the show (e.g. I like Top Gear even more, so I buy the dvd’s, I don’t even download it (mainly because my bandwidth limit doesn’t allow me to download 12 season :P )) but i’m not such a fan of BSG that I would pay for the show wich will only show another 10 episodes and then end forgood…

I hope others will take the effort of reading this (actually rather long) comment and talk about this instead of David using a word wrongly, even if he said he was sorry!

]]> By: Steve Cassidy http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-24354 Steve Cassidy Sun, 04 Jan 2009 02:00:29 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-24354 Mack, you seem to imagine this blog site is outside the system run by Tim, Barry et al. What evidence do you have for that assumption? If you are that long-term a reader and indeed guardian of impartiality, where were you when some idiot wanted to tell me that convection didn't exist? I don't see an iota of impartiality in your contribution: I see more of the same overheated, forum-cooked, barmy "influencing" which follows hot topic threads all around the universe of blogs, forums, chat rooms, and the like. Ho ho, this will make them regret what they said, let's teach them a LESSON... The professional thing to do is not to wallow in the vicarious emotions of a set of fanboy reactions to a throaway line: it is to look at what those reactions are about - where they come from, how they play out, what they achieve. So far we have attracted the attention of a lot of downloaders, who seem well able to defend their chosen soap-opera (by the way, can someone give me another term for what this is - opus, maybe, or serial?), but unable to account for their own actions: the closer we get to understanding their attitude, it seems, the politer we must be, because - well, what? Because it's intimate? Because it's embarrassing, and they know they have been bad? or what? There are some big subjects here - both in the original comment, which I grow more inclined to back up with every attempt to blacken it, by people with motives like yours - and in this thread. It seems that downloaders don't want to think about what their actions mean for the decision makers in the creative companies; don't want to engage in anything, except a kind of autistic, crazily limited "repel thought-crimes" kind of response to commentary; and won't allow other people's opinions of their actions. I'd like very much to get through those reactions and into the heart of what they are doing, preferably without turning this into the Jeremy Kyle show... thanks for your help on that score, by the way. I am also reflecting on one of Pro's finest hours, being the article by Duncan Campbell n Operation Ore. if this blog had been running then, and the work in progress had been blogged, would we ever have been able to reach publication? Mack, you seem to imagine this blog site is outside the system run by Tim, Barry et al. What evidence do you have for that assumption? If you are that long-term a reader and indeed guardian of impartiality, where were you when some idiot wanted to tell me that convection didn’t exist? I don’t see an iota of impartiality in your contribution: I see more of the same overheated, forum-cooked, barmy “influencing” which follows hot topic threads all around the universe of blogs, forums, chat rooms, and the like. Ho ho, this will make them regret what they said, let’s teach them a LESSON…

The professional thing to do is not to wallow in the vicarious emotions of a set of fanboy reactions to a throaway line: it is to look at what those reactions are about – where they come from, how they play out, what they achieve. So far we have attracted the attention of a lot of downloaders, who seem well able to defend their chosen soap-opera (by the way, can someone give me another term for what this is – opus, maybe, or serial?), but unable to account for their own actions: the closer we get to understanding their attitude, it seems, the politer we must be, because – well, what? Because it’s intimate? Because it’s embarrassing, and they know they have been bad? or what?

There are some big subjects here – both in the original comment, which I grow more inclined to back up with every attempt to blacken it, by people with motives like yours – and in this thread. It seems that downloaders don’t want to think about what their actions mean for the decision makers in the creative companies; don’t want to engage in anything, except a kind of autistic, crazily limited “repel thought-crimes” kind of response to commentary; and won’t allow other people’s opinions of their actions. I’d like very much to get through those reactions and into the heart of what they are doing, preferably without turning this into the Jeremy Kyle show… thanks for your help on that score, by the way.

I am also reflecting on one of Pro’s finest hours, being the article by Duncan Campbell n Operation Ore. if this blog had been running then, and the work in progress had been blogged, would we ever have been able to reach publication?

]]> By: Sipart http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-24348 Sipart Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:48:14 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-24348 As a PC Pro subscriber and someone who doesn't really give a jot about SGA (but don't hate me for it :-) I thought it was worth noting that the fine fellow from PC Pro who posted on this blog filed it under RANT - "rant [intransitive and transitive] to talk or complain in a loud excited and rather confused way because you feel strongly about something" I think this is enough of a definition to ensure that anyone who reads the original posting should take it in the manner it was intended. I can vouch for all the journo's professionalism, as I read the mag, website and listen to the podcasts. The mag is a technical PC based publication covering new and current technology - I don't think I have ever seen any reviews for TV programs (good or bad) - so fear not SGA fans I think this is the extent of David's opinion's on TV based sci-fi dramas. Even professional journalists can sometimes have an opinion (wrong or right) – I really thing this is the main reason people involve themselves in blogs – like informal off the cuff comments when in conversations – not deeply researched and analysed commentary. P.S. - I think his real point was about global TV scheduling dates and the affect this has on downloading torrents of said programs ;-) As a PC Pro subscriber and someone who doesn’t really give a jot about SGA (but don’t hate me for it :-) I thought it was worth noting that the fine fellow from PC Pro who posted on this blog filed it under RANT –

“rant [intransitive and transitive]
to talk or complain in a loud excited and rather confused way because you feel strongly about something”

I think this is enough of a definition to ensure that anyone who reads the original posting should take it in the manner it was intended.

I can vouch for all the journo’s professionalism, as I read the mag, website and listen to the podcasts. The mag is a technical PC based publication covering new and current technology – I don’t think I have ever seen any reviews for TV programs (good or bad) – so fear not SGA fans I think this is the extent of David’s opinion’s on TV based sci-fi dramas. Even professional journalists can sometimes have an opinion (wrong or right) – I really thing this is the main reason people involve themselves in blogs – like informal off the cuff comments when in conversations – not deeply researched and analysed commentary.

P.S. – I think his real point was about global TV scheduling dates and the affect this has on downloading torrents of said programs ;-)

]]> By: SM http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-24263 SM Sat, 03 Jan 2009 11:15:16 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-24263 Hi! I find it surprising that you find surprising SGA is so downloaded. No matter if the show is good or not, people like it. Even that guy above, from US, said that the only time he got the epi on a torrent was when it pre-aired - well, guess what? that is the norm for the rest of the world. So: we get the epis in HD, we get it a few minutes after it airs in US (or preaired even), we get it free, we get it without adverts or interruptions, we get to see it when we want, where we want, in the right order, we don't miss episodes (we can always get them years after they aired (example Trekies have all shows available, as do old-BSG fans) and the net, with multiple sources, ends up being more reliable than any TV station - is there anything else?! It's very strange that people in the business don't realize this... Until watching it legally is as good as this, the market won't work and torrents will live. Torrent sites like mininova.org or thepiratebay.org are free. There is NO way a video carry virus or trojans, or whatever. That's BS from people that actually don't know much about computers. As long as you don't run .EXE or install software (or VIDEO CODECs from unknown sources), you are ok. Oh... and no matter how much I like SGA, BSG is far better ;) even more so than TNG, which was the greatest until now. Hi! I find it surprising that you find surprising SGA is so downloaded. No matter if the show is good or not, people like it. Even that guy above, from US, said that the only time he got the epi on a torrent was when it pre-aired – well, guess what? that is the norm for the rest of the world. So: we get the epis in HD, we get it a few minutes after it airs in US (or preaired even), we get it free, we get it without adverts or interruptions, we get to see it when we want, where we want, in the right order, we don’t miss episodes (we can always get them years after they aired (example Trekies have all shows available, as do old-BSG fans) and the net, with multiple sources, ends up being more reliable than any TV station – is there anything else?! It’s very strange that people in the business don’t realize this… Until watching it legally is as good as this, the market won’t work and torrents will live. Torrent sites like mininova.org or thepiratebay.org are free. There is NO way a video carry virus or trojans, or whatever. That’s BS from people that actually don’t know much about computers. As long as you don’t run .EXE or install software (or VIDEO CODECs from unknown sources), you are ok. Oh… and no matter how much I like SGA, BSG is far better ;) even more so than TNG, which was the greatest until now.

]]> By: Adam Lane http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-24189 Adam Lane Fri, 02 Jan 2009 20:08:29 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-24189 What is it with Poms bagging Stargate at the moment, Russell T Davies now this mob. One episode of Atlantis is more entertaining than a whole season of all the murder mystery crap that comes out of the Motherland. Seriously, I watched an episode of The Bill the other day and I can honestly say I've never had the urge to harm myself before that. What is it with Poms bagging Stargate at the moment, Russell T Davies now this mob. One episode of Atlantis is more entertaining than a whole season of all the murder mystery crap that comes out of the Motherland. Seriously, I watched an episode of The Bill the other day and I can honestly say I’ve never had the urge to harm myself before that.

]]> By: Mack http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/12/24/entertainment-industry-heads-in-sand-still-surely-not/comment-page-2/#comment-23748 Mack Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:29:54 +0000 http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/?p=4948#comment-23748 Just to ensure you both know where I am coming from with my comments...I am a daily reader of the PC Pro newspages and blog posts (apparently now at level 100, whatever that means!) I often complete the surveys which I am sent from your site (as I am such a 'valued' member). You lost any chance of a reasoned debate on the subject of why people download programs when you made unnecessary value judgements about the worth of a much loved series...Whether that was through stupidity or through a desire to create a little controversy I would not care to guess. However your attitude and that of the 'abrasive' contributing editor (adding petrol to the flames was so helpful Steve) causes me to question the impartiality which I have assumd ever since the 1st edition of PC Pro. A little respect for the opinions of others wouldn't go amiss, and a return to a more lofty standard of journalism than shown recently would be welcome. Your recent comments would never have made it through the editorial process for the printed magazine and there have been UB40's a plenty for the unedited bloggers of many companies who were too quick on the keyboard as you both well know. Don't try too hard to get on the wrong side of the readers - it is foolish to bite the hand that signs your pay cheque. Just to ensure you both know where I am coming from with my comments…I am a daily reader of the PC Pro newspages and blog posts (apparently now at level 100, whatever that means!) I often complete the surveys which I am sent from your site (as I am such a ‘valued’ member). You lost any chance of a reasoned debate on the subject of why people download programs when you made unnecessary value judgements about the worth of a much loved series…Whether that was through stupidity or through a desire to create a little controversy I would not care to guess. However your attitude and that of the ‘abrasive’ contributing editor (adding petrol to the flames was so helpful Steve) causes me to question the impartiality which I have assumd ever since the 1st edition of PC Pro.
A little respect for the opinions of others wouldn’t go amiss, and a return to a more lofty standard of journalism than shown recently would be welcome. Your recent comments would never have made it through the editorial process for the printed magazine and there have been UB40’s a plenty for the unedited bloggers of many companies who were too quick on the keyboard as you both well know. Don’t try too hard to get on the wrong side of the readers – it is foolish to bite the hand that signs your pay cheque.

]]>