I thought I was the pedantic, anal and tedious one, yet I always Hoover with my Dyson.
(Well, I don't actually, that's one of 'er indoors' jobs.)
TV Forum Watch News and Information Board
- Nick Harvey
- God
- Posts: 4160
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 22.26
- Location: Deepest Wiltshire
- Contact:
I Dyson with my Dyson.
That aside, noted idiot Tumble Wumble has decided that only BBC1 and 2 should be in HD due to him deciding that a selected list of shows that would be good in HD would not be good in HD.
That aside, noted idiot Tumble Wumble has decided that only BBC1 and 2 should be in HD due to him deciding that a selected list of shows that would be good in HD would not be good in HD.
http://www.tvforum.co.uk/forums/post664579#post664579
You mean the BBC is getting a second HD channel? Why not rename the existing BBC HD channel BBC One HD, and make it a HD / upscaled SD carbon copy of BBC One, and call the new one BBC Two HD, to be an HD / upscaled SD carbon copy of BBC Two?
The other BBC channels (BBC Three, BBC Four, CBBC, CBeebies, BBC News, BBC Parliament) can remain SD only. Still that's no problem judging by their content:
BBC Three: who needs Little Angels or Family Guy in HD? Even EastEnders repeats in SD are fine, you've had chance to see them in HD proper time on BBC One HD.
BBC Four: who wants Opera Italia or Elvis In Las Vegas in HD?
CBBC: what on Earth's the point in showing Chucklevision , Arthur or Tracy Beaker in HD?
CBeebies: there's no point putting Tweenies , In The Night Garden , a bedtime story or the goodnight song in HD.
BBC News: news and weather look good enough in SD, ditto Click (computer/internet documentary).
BBC Parliament: it's only the inside of the House of Commons, who needs HD for that?
"He has to be larger than bacon"
- DVB Cornwall
- Posts: 519
- Joined: Fri 24 Jun, 2005 21.42
- Gavin Scott
- Admin
- Posts: 6442
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.16
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Twat of the month award goes to Mr 54 posts - "Chewy", who joins TV Forum hot-foot from DS forums, and brings with him all of their foul attitude.
So far he's suggested that everyone is a troll, and that we're not adults (specifically telling me to "grow up" - beyond my 38 years I assume).
Then he goes on to mention that he only, "WANTED to know when Corrie is on".
I think when you write the word like that it rather suggests you are DEMANDING.
So far he's suggested that everyone is a troll, and that we're not adults (specifically telling me to "grow up" - beyond my 38 years I assume).
Then he goes on to mention that he only, "WANTED to know when Corrie is on".
I think when you write the word like that it rather suggests you are DEMANDING.
- DVB Cornwall
- Posts: 519
- Joined: Fri 24 Jun, 2005 21.42
Your usual pithy style of retort hopefully will be effective,

- Gavin Scott
- Admin
- Posts: 6442
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.16
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
It would seem it already has been - as Chewy's utterances have been erased from that part of the discussion.DVB Cornwall wrote:Your usual pithy style of retort hopefully will be effective,
What has the London Tonight thread descended into? It seems as though Mocalaoalaolaoalaolao just talks about whichever woman is presenting London Tonight and says how stunning they look, despite them all looking shockingly bad.
Invasion of the Ignoramuses:
http://www.tvforum.co.uk/forums/post667490#post667490
http://www.tvforum.co.uk/forums/post667490#post667490
And somebody thinks the BBC would offer Lorraine (known by her first name only because everyone knows who she is - you know, like Madonna, Oprah, Kylie..) a job on Breakfast.tellyboxPLUS wrote:this is a tv fan site not let rate the judge if u want to do that phone syco upGavin Scott wrote:Guess its just me who's insanely bored with X Factor then?
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a good reality show, but all the intrigue about the judges gets *so* dull.
If it was about the contestants (as it should be) then I'd probably watch it.
-
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Sat 08 Nov, 2008 19.48