>There's nothing inherently *wrong* with pleasing the 'masses', you know. It's only a problem when the performer/writer is being cynical.
>
>Would you rather a comedy show appealed *only* to a handful of obsessive comedy fans?
>
>Also - who are these 'plebs'?
>
Firstly - What's wrong with being cynical when there is so much to be cynical about. It's better than accepting the lowest common denominator.

Secondly - are there really obsessive comody fans.

Lastly - the plebs are those who accept the bullshit without the wit to aspire to anything greater.

(this sounds more aggresive than it was meant to)

>Firstly - What's wrong with being cynical when there is so much to be cynical about. It's better than accepting the lowest common denominator.

I'm talking about people ignoring their own tastes and preferences to appeal to 'popular tastes' - something which fails more often than it succeeds, incidentally. Being cynical is *striving* for the lowest common denominator. I could have used the word 'mercenary' instead.

>Secondly - are there really obsessive >comody fans.

Ermm.. yes. Look to the left of the screen. Edit News! Nothing wrong with it of course, but why should producers and performers pander to a tiny, if vocal, minority alone?

>Lastly - the plebs are those who accept the bullshit without the wit to aspire to anything greater.

Do you know anyone like that? Seriously. In person? Or are all your mates not 'plebs'? Thought not - does that suggest anything to you?

And in many spheres of life you too could be considered plebs. You can't be elitist in everything.

>(this sounds more aggresive than it was meant to)

It certainly sounds more confused than it was meant to.

>Ermm.. yes. Look to the left of the screen. Edit News! Nothing wrong with it of course, but why should producers and performers pander to a tiny, if vocal, minority alone?

Because all they want to do is exploit us and treat us like idiots, and if we don't speak up then there's no hope. You may not know about this, but not so long ago a certain individual used his legal clout to enforce the removal from this site of a script that he had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH. Some of us stood up to him - we didn't win, but at least we tried. If we all just idly sat back and said nothing, then nothing would ever change.

And in a way we did win, because we all argued intelligently and coherently, while he just acted like a seven year old in a playground with a copy of the Viz Profanisaurus.

Who did get the site closed down, then?

No - I'm not confused at all, or at least, - I wasn't.

Cynical and mercenary don't mean the same thing at all.

I just don't agree with you.

>>Ermm.. yes. Look to the left of the screen. Edit News! Nothing wrong with it of course, but why should producers and performers pander to a tiny, if vocal, minority alone?
>
>Because all they want to do is exploit us and treat us like idiots,

No they don't. *Some* of them do. I'm not talking about some know-nothing fool taking scripts down from this site. I'm talking about popular appeal, and how some people on this site see that as wrong *in itself*.

Anyway, how are these people exploiting you? By *forcing* you to buy a book with a script in because you can't get it on an internet?

There's no doubt that marketing cynicism ('belief that everyone is inherently selfish', harry) has changed the way TV is made. But as I said - it rarely works very well in making a genuinely successful and popular programme. Take 'Coupling' - clearly written to exploit certain perceived needs in the ABC1 16-34 demographic. And it didn't work - people didn't like it very much. There's no such thing as a 'sure-fire comedy hit'.

My point is that 'lowering' yourself to popular appeal can sometimes be a good thing. In fact, (shh...) some performers actually like it when the audience laugh.

>and if we don't speak up then there's no hope.

Yes there is. Stop over-estimating the importance of gobby obsessives. What's *really* going to happen if you don't speak up about the fact that the cast for the film of Red Dwarf is all wrong?

>You may not know about this, but not so long ago a certain individual used his legal clout to enforce the removal from this site of a script that he had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH. Some of us stood up to him - we didn't win, but at least we tried. If we all just idly sat back and said nothing, then nothing would ever change.

I did know about that. The man seems to be a fucking idiot, and there's no doubt about that. Worse than that, he's a Python quote spouting fucking idiot.

But really, the disappearance of a script from an internet is hardly the end of the world is it? A shame maybe, but still... I'm more interested in how you think having a go at 'populist' comedy is going to prevent greedy people threatening this site?

>Cynical and mercenary don't mean the same thing at all.
>
>I just don't agree with you.

If I have a cynical outlook, I assume that everyone is selfish including myself. Therefore I have no obligation to avoid exploiting others, as they would do the same to me. Therefore I can act in a mercenary way. Not *exactly* the same, but as near as dammit.

You seemed to understand cynical to mean 'cool and sarcastic about stuff like what Bill Hicks was'.

>Who did get the site closed down, then?

We all know better than to discuss that.

>>and if we don't speak up then there's no hope.
>
>Yes there is. Stop over-estimating the importance of gobby obsessives. What's *really* going to happen if you don't speak up about the fact that the cast for the film of Red Dwarf is all wrong?

I have never, ever, ever taken a stand about something so trivial. You are clearly very ignorant if you think that all arguments boil down to that level.

Jessica said:

>>Nothing wrong with it of course, but why should producers and performers pander to a tiny, if vocal, minority alone?

TJ retorted:

>Because all they want to do is exploit us and treat us like idiots, and if we don't speak up then there's no hope.

Can you back either of the assertions in this statement up with evidence? Also, can you explain why it answers the question above?

Cheerio

Steve

P.S. TJ - I don't know the address for your site and so can't contact you re; the Kwackers stuff.

Surely, the site only has a go at 'populist' comedy is the creators think its crap - or have i missed the point somewhere? The site is showing that mistakes made on comedy, by the industry, which are easily rectified by hiring people who care about what they are producing (which doesn't just apply to comedy - The 100 greatest Tv moments in hell and stop press articles highlight other areas), are still being made. Suc as Yoakum ignoring the fact that people were generally intereasted in something which he admitted would never see the light of day.
Obsessive fans might be in a minority, but, as sceience fiction shows, these are the people that can mean the difference between a cancelled show and a successful one.

>We all know better than to discuss that.

Well, no, I don't. Is there any reason why this can't be discussed, maybe for people who've criminally not always been on the forum, or who don't have time to trawl the internet?

>>>and if we don't speak up then there's no hope.
>>
>>Yes there is. Stop over-estimating the importance of gobby obsessives. What's *really* going to happen if you don't speak up about the fact that the cast for the film of Red Dwarf is all wrong?
>
>I have never, ever, ever taken a stand about something so trivial.

I'm not accusing *you* of that - more a vaguely defined 'mass' of comedy obsessives. Much like the 'plebs' you all like to have a go at.

>You are clearly very ignorant if you think that all arguments boil down to that level.

*All* arguments boil down to that level. That's what I think. All of them. 'Are free will and determinism compatible?' - that boils down to the same level. 'Is abortion murder?' - that boils down to the same level. 'What does the cutaneous rabbit imply for theory of mind?' - that boils down to the same level. 'Do I overdo the sarcasm?' - that boils down to the same level.

Seriously, people do get worked up about the cast of film adaptations. It's not trivial to them - how is your getting worked up about that script any different? (This is curiosity, not a dig - I still think what he did was out of order.)

Also I am very ignorant.