hehehe...Grok r0x

Actually there is a supplemental question, which is "Does the govt fund Network TV in the US?" in which case - just as with the Pay stations - surely those who fund the shows (taxpayers) should determine content, presumably thru a representative body of some description (either by apointment or election).

They do through millions of dollars of anti-drug, military and other such propoganda.

My question (since this seems to have sparked a whole load of anti-regulation opinions) is "Should the media be regulate at all?". My answer to this would be a resounding yes. I don't want (for instance) hard-core porn on free to air daytime TV where kids can see it. (Actually I don't want porn on free to air TV at all but hey).

The fact is that if it was completely controlled privately monetary profits would answer this question. Could hard core porn show on TV without huge backlash? Most likely not, if it could, then there is a viable reason for the broadcaster to be showing such content.

How ridiculous! Everyone knows that an Australian man goes nowhere without at least one tin of Fosters beer in his hand

Or Four-X. Personally, I was always a Victoria Bitter man myself.

You have to pay to see the nude women on TV in the US. It's still a no no on broadcast television. Since sex sells, they are not about to give it away for free.

Carlin from years ago, when he spent most of his time strung out on drugs, was king. Now, eh.

I agree. To me he's rarely funny anymore, he mostly just goes on angry rants. Also, and I hate to say this, he just seems so hypocritical (hippycritical?) when he starts going off on the rich - I really doubt he's been living in a van down by the river. Not to mention his references to corporate America and selling out when he's been in so many commercials.

*** As usual, I could be wrong. But really, what are the odds of that happening twice? ***

Blue, jDoom!

what he said.

Work smarter not harder, also

Is it really Doom's frantic play that causes you to experience the pain of clenching and pounding keys? Perhaps in Doom, you noticed it more because the side effects of your playing was much more evident?

If you are trying too hard then you need to relax when playing as a priority. Anytime you clench or press keys too hard you gotta recognise it and stop immediately. It's kinda difficult to do at first but after a while you soon find the "zone" and gaming is so much easier.

You'll eventually find yourself sitting back watching the game while you're playing it and it doesn't matter if you lose a bit of what you perceive as your skills while learning to play this way 'cos in your current state of mind you'll actually be nowhere near your playing potential.

Calmness in gaming is the ultimate experience! Everyone should stay within their calm playing boundaries regardless of perceived experience or skill level outside it. Eventually those boundaries become much broader resulting in a much more enjoyable playing experience.

George Carlin is the king!

Carlin from years ago, when he spent most of his time strung out on drugs, was king. Now, eh.


-TPFKAS2S

I lvoe you Blue, will you have my illegitimate Love child?

www.newdoom.com check out jdoom too it has tcpip now and really kicks legacys ass by far... tweek your open gl settings and you can get a awesome dynamic light effect ... not to mention its real dynamic light compare to legacys ... net codeing is doing good ... a lot better then legacy at least comepared to the last time i plaied dont know how it is now cuz nobody ever hosts on the inet also if you grab the mp2 models for jdoom it looks 100% better ... trust me on this one blue i use to play legacy all the time til i downloaded jdoom one day ... turned the lense flairs down to 1 cuz it got annoying with 1000 lens flairs and then i never even looked at legacy again.. pluss jdoom also works for heretic and hexen wich is fun to play from time to time

You guys are soooooo behind - they were here over a year ago at the Just For Laugh festival. They were the big hit that year...

George Carlin is the king! I'm surprised they didn't use his version of America the beautiful while they were at it.

"Oh Beautiful for smoggy skies,insecticided grain,
For strip-mined mountain's majesty above the asphalt plain.
America, America, man sheds his waste on thee, And hides the pines with billboard signs, from sea to oily sea."

In the UK I believe they use the "Scandanvian test". After 9(10?)pm UK TV shows are free to show nudity, however the male form isn't allowed to be elevated higher than the angle of the Scandanavian countries to Europe. I, too, wonder who works all this out

I can picture morale-protectors sitting in front of their TV with some angle-measurement tool, trying to figure out wether they can complain to someone

Not something I'd want on my resume. What's really funny in the States is that you can't see that kind of stuff on TV but go to a public library that offers internet access and anything goes! Figures that the gov't says you can't watch naked bods (via network TV) in the privacy of your home, so go to a public place a peruse it on the net


-TPFKAS2S

The deal here is that network telivision is regulated by the government

Actually, I believe that's also the case here in Germany. But it seems that our laws in that respect are a bit more generous -- essentially, as long as it's not hardcore porn it is ok to show it after 10pm.

On a side-note: there is actually a precise definition of what constitutes pornography here - based on the "erection angle" of the penis. If I remember correctly, if it's less than 30 degrees it is not considered porn :).

I can picture morale-protectors sitting in front of their TV with some angle-measurement tool, trying to figure out wether they can complain to someone %).

Blue, for deathmatch over the net, you should check out ZDaemon and csDoom (both sites slip me atm) Both offer TCP/IP netplay with netcode borrowed from QuakeWorld. I was able to play with 4 other people (no more though) on a 28.8kbps AOL connection. If I'm not mistaken, ZDaemon is based off of csDoom, after certain things happened to csDoom.

I've got to agree that the US is the most prudish, yet whorish country around when it comes to the media. It's so screwed up, no wonder the crime rates so high- people don't know what to think. I think part of the reason they can't show guys naked is the politicians are scared their wives will see that someone else has a bigger package than they do...

And, as a public service announcement, please folks, don't substitute a lemon for a condom. Condoms are still the most effective way of preventing STD's. Lemons won't block icky stuff like genital warts, and the study didn't even mention lemon juice's effect (if any) on other fun STD's like herpes, syphilis, and ghonnorea.

My question (since this seems to have sparked a whole load of anti-regulation opinions) is "Should the media be regulate at all?"

I believe you need to ask yourself another question first: Who owns the medium that transmits the signal? I believe that the frequencies are owned by no one or everyone for that matter. Because of this someone needs to regulate the industry. Otherewise you'd have large businesses attempting to blow out each others signal with larger and larger signals.

I don't want (for instance) hard-core porn on free to air daytime TV where kids can see it.

My kids see roughly 2 hours of tv a day. After I get home from work the TV gets turned off until they go to bed. Now my kids are young, but old enough that I really don't want them watching 99% of the programs that come on after dinner. I spend a lot of time setting the timer on my VCR.

It seems to me that if we say Yes to my question then we have a more sensible discussion about what should and shouldn't be censored. At this point the arguments about shows such as "Puppetry of the Penis" becomes a better exchange of opinion.

Agreed, in the US sex is the big hang up. You can show people being blown up. You can even show people in bed together during day time TV (soaps). But don't you dare show the naked form (esp. the male form). I would guess that this goes back to the fact that this country was settled by a pretty up tight group of religious people.

Actually there is a supplemental question, which is "Does the govt fund Network TV in the US?" in which case - just as with the Pay stations - surely those who fund the shows (taxpayers) should determine content, presumably thru a representative body of some description (either by apointment or election).

I don't know if the federal governement funds network TV. I do know that the government makes big money from leasing the frequencies for cell phones, etc.

I also know that the FCC is run by appointment. It is not a representative body. Currently the FCC is run by Colin Powells son. Nepotism at its best


-TPFKAS2S

The deal here is that network telivision is regulated by the government (FCC) because the government regulates the airwaves (this goes for radio as well) and not private business. This means that they censor language

My question (since this seems to have sparked a whole load of anti-regulation opinions) is "Should the media be regulate at all?". My answer to this would be a resounding yes. I don't want (for instance) hard-core porn on free to air daytime TV where kids can see it. (Actually I don't want porn on free to air TV at all but hey).

It seems to me that if we say Yes to my question then we have a more sensible discussion about what should and shouldn't be censored. At this point the arguments about shows such as "Puppetry of the Penis" becomes a better exchange of opinion. (Personallly I buy the "its only teenage kids humour so what the hell let programs with an audience of immature kids watch it" argument). 'There should be no censorship at all' is an equally valid argument (though completely unrealistic and mad IMO).

Actually there is a supplemental question, which is "Does the govt fund Network TV in the US?" in which case - just as with the Pay stations - surely those who fund the shows (taxpayers) should determine content, presumably thru a representative body of some description (either by apointment or election).



Anvil