Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

IGNORED

One Semenyo in Bristol


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, samo II said:

Okay pal, no drama.

But for the record; I don’t think saying “don’t like it, don’t listen” is a reductive position - it’s the truth.

I respect that someone can hold the view they don’t like OSIB for whatever reason (sponsorship, conflict of interest etc.) but doesn’t mean anyone who disagrees has to listen to their take on it, so saying “don’t like it, don’t listen” is a completely fine take if that’s as far as they want to take that debate.

Holding an opinion doesn’t mean you’re owed a response.

That's all true - but the impression I got from @Prinny's posts is that he acknowledged that from the off hence why I took issue with some of the responses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, !james said:

Not really... It's a free podcast to discuss Bristol City. Fairly simple to simpletons like me. If they were asking you to sign up to Mansion Bet to create accounts to listen it might warrant further discussion. If they offer free bets and listeners create accounts then that is their choice.

Fundamentally it's for the OSIB guys to weigh up how it will be done. I'm sure if they notice a significant drop in listener numbers if people take Prinnys views they might reconsider. 

 

 

I think we're at risk of taking what should be a small footnote discussion point too far. The listenership will grow with better promotion, better production values and better guests - but Prinny's point isn't about whether the listeners will keep listening, it's a more nuanced point about the ethics of the sponsorship and whether there's conflict of interest.

As above, I don't listen that often so don't necessarily have a horse in this race (apart from if it's a MansionBet free wager), but felt it was an interesting thing to consider either way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Phileas Fogg said:

I think you've actually been very fair in your criticism and acknowledge that it's just from your point of view. It's a shame that some people are just giving you the predictable and overly simplistic "don't like it? don't listen then!" response.

You're raising a fairly nuanced point which people either don't understand or are misrepresenting. It's right to raise these things imo. I hadn't thought about it before you raised it but I think it's worth asking about.

It is a fair point though, don't like it, don't listen. But I already made that point and said I won't so it's a bit redundant! Much like the podcast this forum has its elements of wading through the bad to get to the good. IMO of course. People who aren't very good at making their points will misrepresent because it's easier for them.

1 minute ago, samo II said:

So anyone who has an issue with the commentary is either stupid or Machiavellian - pretty gross take tbh with you.

Thanks for being the one enlightened person who points out how dumb we all are; what would be do without you?

I think this is fair criticism of the post. It should definitely say SOME people. There are legitimate opposing views of course! And then there are some people deliberately trying to misrepresent what I said.

1 minute ago, petehinton said:

Still far from the truth mate, just gotta listen to the Holden appointment ep where the criticism of the board and the process was pretty clear!

 

Totally get the viewpoint and concern, but it’s just not the case. Also understand you probably would expect me to say that & dont believe it. I probably would too

I mean I did, and it was quite tame compared to some of the views on here. Again not calling it dishonest because I wouldn't know if you're being dishonest. and you don't need an extreme nut job saying "burn down Lansdown house" on there to "balance" anything. Your views are your views, but because the conflict of interest is there, I have to put a filter on them. I don't want to dismiss you entirely, I'd just "ignore" you if I thought that.

"You would say that wouldn't you?" You can't really win here, and that's right. Those could be your views, you could be lying because either way you'd say the same thing. But because of the conflict of interest, you saying anything doesn't really matter. Which is why people try to avoid them. You defending the podcast which you're on, is hard for you. Even if you're 100% right.

It's especially hard if you guys try to discredit my comments in the way Olé did with a ridiculous exaggeration or if you tried to claim sponsor giveaways are wholly for the fans... which you didn't but you also didn't exactly spell out the true motives either. That's the kind of stuff that makes me not want to listen.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Prinny said:

It is a fair point though, don't like it, don't listen. But I already made that point and said I won't so it's a bit redundant! Much like the podcast this forum has its elements of wading through the bad to get to the good. IMO of course. People who aren't very good at making their points will misrepresent because it's easier for them.

I think this is fair criticism of the post. It should definitely say SOME people. There are legitimate opposing views of course! And then there are some people deliberately trying to misrepresent what I said.

 

Edited it now to say 'some', you're right about that.

I was trying to defend you though! 😒 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Prinny said:

It is a fair point though, don't like it, don't listen. But I already made that point and said I won't so it's a bit redundant! Much like the podcast this forum has its elements of wading through the bad to get to the good. IMO of course. People who aren't very good at making their points will misrepresent because it's easier for them.

I think this is fair criticism of the post. It should definitely say SOME people. There are legitimate opposing views of course! And then there are some people deliberately trying to misrepresent what I said.

I mean I did, and it was quite tame compared to some of the views on here. Again not calling it dishonest because I wouldn't know if you're being dishonest. and you don't need an extreme nut job saying "burn down Lansdown house" on there to "balance" anything. Your views are your views, but because the conflict of interest is there, I have to put a filter on them. I don't want to dismiss you entirely, I'd just "ignore" you if I thought that.

"You would say that wouldn't you?" You can't really win here, and that's right. Those could be your views, you could be lying because either way you'd say the same thing. But because of the conflict of interest, you saying anything doesn't really matter. Which is why people try to avoid them. You defending the podcast which you're on, is hard for you. Even if you're 100% right.

It's especially hard if you guys try to discredit my comments in the way Olé did with a ridiculous exaggeration or if you tried to claim sponsor giveaways are wholly for the fans... which you didn't but you also didn't exactly spell out the true motives either. That's the kind of stuff that makes me not want to listen.

 

The giveaways are wholly for listeners, does that help? Feel free to DM anything else as this seems to have been blown out of proportion :laugh: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've listened to the podcast since episode 1, I enjoy it. I can't pinpoint the exact moments, but I have thought to myself a few times over the past few months that it is probably a bit too close to the club now and questioned if they were really saying what they really want to say here? 

You can skip the Mansion Bet stuff if you dislike it.

iPhone allows you to skip 30 seconds at a time with the press of a button, Stan mentioned it's 60 seconds, do it twice and job done! Forget that it was ever there.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, petehinton said:

The receiving of free gifts was for giveaways btw. So benefits listeners/fans not the podcast directly 

 

5 minutes ago, petehinton said:

The giveaways are wholly for listeners, does that help? Feel free to DM anything else as this seems to have been blown out of proportion :laugh:

 

How do you define listeners? People who don't appear on the show or everyone who listens including yourselves and the editor and even potentially mansionbet? This is very important to the discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Prinny said:

 

 

How do you define listeners? People who don't appear on the show or everyone who listens including yourselves and the editor and even potentially mansionbet? This is very important to the discussion.

People that listen and enter the competition(s)..we’ll have to announce who wins so we aren’t exactly going to rig it and just give it to ourselves 😁

Edited by petehinton
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 minutes ago, petehinton said:

People that listen and enter the competition(s)..we’ll have to announce who wins so we aren’t exactly going to rig it and just give it to ourselves 😁

You're being very political. Define listener. Does that include people who have appeared on the shows?

Will you say that no one who has appeared on the podcast will be able to enter these giveaways?

I will not attempt enter to make this absolutely clear.

 

Edited by Prinny
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Prinny said:

 

You're being very political. Define listener. Does that include people who have appeared on the shows?

Will you say that no one who has appeared on the podcast will be able to enter these giveaways?

 

Nah you’ve caught us red handed there tbf. The whole ploy was just to keep all the stuff to ourselves in a mcmillions style job. 
 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Prinny said:

 

You're being very political. Define listener. Does that include people who have appeared on the shows?

Will you say that no one who has appeared on the podcast will be able to enter these giveaways?

I will not attempt enter to make this absolutely clear.

 

He isn’t; you’re just looking for a fight/attention.

You’re about one more pointless provocation from me muting you - further proof that if you don’t like what’s being said, you don’t have to listen in action.

As I said before; for a place which has so many absolutely thrash takes on all things BCFC, I’m grateful OTIB played a small part in producing something as thoughtful as OSIB.

Edited by samo II
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Prinny said:

It's especially hard if you guys try to discredit my comments in the way Olé did with a ridiculous exaggeration

Sorry, how exactly did I discredit your comments? You discredited your own comments by turning your quite reasonable argument about the integrity of sponsorship from a gambling company, into a completely separate point about advertising on OTIB, and with quite a provocative and personal remark about "his business".

I'm sure Stan can speak for himself, but personally I'd find that kind of remark incredibly hurtful. I see it all the time, someone takes all the risk and hard graft to build something or do something creative, and the minute there's a nominal reward, they're demonised as in it for themselves, undermining years of voluntary effort.

These sorts of initiatives take a huge amount of time and personal sacrifice with very little reward compared to just working 9-5 and getting paid properly. My sarcasm just reflected the ridiculousness of your own point back on you - yours was the ridiculous exaggeration. A podcast is advertising a business on OTIB? Really?

The sad thing is I'd quite happily have a sensible discussion about the integrity of involving a gambling company (an industry I know very well, warts and all) and you won't find any argument from me about the risks to editorial independence. But the business comment on the other hand came across as spiteful and misplaced.

Anyone want to buy any t-shirts?

  • Like 14
  • Haha 2
  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Olé said:

Sorry, how exactly did I discredit your comments? You discredited your own comments by turning your quite reasonable argument about the integrity of sponsorship from a gambling company, into a completely separate point about advertising on OTIB, and with quite a provocative and personal remark about "his business".

I'm sure Stan can speak for himself, but personally I'd find that kind of remark incredibly hurtful. I see it all the time, someone takes all the risk and hard graft to build something or do something creative, and the minute there's a nominal reward, they're demonised as in it for themselves, undermining years of voluntary effort.

These sorts of initiatives take a huge amount of time and personal sacrifice with very little reward compared to just working 9-5 and getting paid properly. My sarcasm just reflected the ridiculousness of your own point back on you - yours was the ridiculous exaggeration. A podcast is advertising a business on OTIB? Really?

The sad thing is I'd quite happily have a sensible discussion about the integrity of involving a gambling company (an industry I know very well, warts and all) and you won't find any argument from me about the risks to editorial independence. But the business comment on the other hand came across as spiteful and misplaced.

Anyone want to buy any t-shirts?

Hear, hear.

More eloquently put than I would manage but fully agree and speaks to the root of my own annoyance with the discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Prinny said:

 

You're being very political. Define listener. Does that include people who have appeared on the shows?

Will you say that no one who has appeared on the podcast will be able to enter these giveaways?

I will not attempt enter to make this absolutely clear.

 

Blimey mate.

Clearly an illustrious career as an investigative journalist at the Bristol Post awaits you based on this!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, petehinton said:

Blimey, none of the contributors will enter any of the giveaways. We can phone into sound of the city and say it too if you like 

Thanks for the clarity! That's all you needed to say. 

1 minute ago, samo II said:

He isn’t; you’re just looking for a fight/attention.

You’re about one more pointless provocation from me muting you - further proof that if you don’t like what’s being said, you don’t have to listen in action.

As I said before; for a place which has so many absolutely thrash takes on all things BCFC, I’m grateful OTIB played a small part in producing something as thoughtful as OSIB.

i mean I want the attention of the responses to my questions or I wouldn't have asked them. I'm not looking for a fight because you'd assume my aim would be to have people agree with me or in this case to answer the questions I pose. So we'd all agree or they'd do what I want, and no fighting. So saying that makes no sense.

I don't think it's pointless to provoke a response about the rules of a competition. the people who enter would surely see a point in knowing those rules and I see an interest in the competition being held fairly. And if my contributions are a negative for you, I fully encourage you to mute me. Mental health and your personal happiness are important! I won't be ignoring you, as I don't think you're being dishonest here.

5 minutes ago, !james said:

Why does it matter to you so much? Genuinely interested why you are labouring the point after already stating on the first page you won't be listening again. 

Because I'm genuinely interested in the discussion and the reasons and people behind the decisions taken. So pretty similar to your reasons for asking me for an explanation I'd assume!

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Carey 6 said:

I've listened to the podcast since episode 1, I enjoy it. I can't pinpoint the exact moments, but I have thought to myself a few times over the past few months that it is probably a bit too close to the club now and questioned if they were really saying what they really want to say here? 

You can skip the Mansion Bet stuff if you dislike it.

iPhone allows you to skip 30 seconds at a time with the press of a button, Stan mentioned it's 60 seconds, do it twice and job done! Forget that it was ever there.

 

I will do the same, I’ve no problem with the lads taking money for advertising, I just won’t listen to the ads though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess the announcement in the podcast has done what @Shtanleypredicted although nice to see more positive comments than negative.

For me, from the little I know of Stan I am somewhat surprised with it and who it is but I really liked the honesty in letting us all know.

The key thing I think we be for it not to influence the podcast too much, if at all and I am sure @Shtanleyand @petehintonwill be mindful of that anyway.

If it was me by the way I would’ve done exactly the same and would’ve got as much money as possible! I think you can still make a credible end product without “selling your soul”. There are plenty of other podcasts and radio shows that still have decent honest content without fear of the sponsor. 

Edited by One Team
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Olé said:

Sorry, how exactly did I discredit your comments? You didn't, you tried to, which is different. You discredited your own comments by turning your quite reasonable argument about the integrity of sponsorship from a gambling company, into a completely separate point about advertising on OTIB, and with quite a provocative and personal remark about "his business".

I'm sure Stan can speak for himself, but personally I'd find that kind of remark incredibly hurtful. I see it all the time, someone takes all the risk and hard graft to build something or do something creative, and the minute there's a nominal reward, they're demonised as in it for themselves, undermining years of voluntary effort.

These sorts of initiatives take a huge amount of time and personal sacrifice with very little reward compared to just working 9-5 and getting paid properly. My sarcasm just reflected the ridiculousness of your own point back on you - yours was the ridiculous exaggeration. A podcast is advertising a business on OTIB? Really?

Advertising - describe or draw attention to (a product, service, or event) in a public medium in order to promote sales or attendance

Yes really. It's the literal definition of advertising.

The sad thing is I'd quite happily have a sensible discussion about the integrity of involving a gambling company (an industry I know very well, warts and all) and you won't find any argument from me about the risks to editorial independence. But the business comment on the other hand came across as spiteful and misplaced.

Anyone want to buy any t-shirts?

Except I'm not demonising him. Which is the misrepresentation of my views which I'm talking about. And that invalidates everything you're saying. Your premise is wrong.

I don't think think he's a terrible person for doing what he's doing. Nowhere have I said that. So.. yeah.

And I'd still be interested to see the views/policies on advertising businesses here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Prinny said:

I mean I want the attention of the responses to my questions or I wouldn't have asked them. I'm not looking for a fight because you'd assume my aim would be to have people agree with me or in this case to answer the questions I pose. So we'd all agree or they'd do what I want, and no fighting. So saying that makes no sense.

I don't think it's pointless to provoke a response about the rules of a competition. the people who enter would surely see a point in knowing those rules and I see an interest in the competition being held fairly. And if my contributions are a negative for you, I fully encourage you to mute me. Mental health and your personal happiness are important! I won't be ignoring you, as I don't think you're being dishonest here.

Point one: enough of you’re responses (intentionally or otherwise) are confrontational - the pod posed the question regards thoughts on them taking sponsorship, you then added the factor regards OSIB being able to post (“advertise” as you put it, in the first of a number of pointedly provocative posts) on here, and then called a OSIB contributor of being “political” when you got an incomplete answer to a question you posed - that you choose to be confrontational when it’s not required is notable.

Second point; these Masion Bet competitions haven’t even been announced yet - if you were as diligent a truth seeker and not simply seeking confrontation you’d have remembered that from the podcast... which you don’t even listen to, apparently.

You’re not some appointed advocate for this place or the fans who do listen and may take part, so maybe avoid wasting everyone’s time trying to get into fights with people who produce a podcast that requires no commitment or cost from anyone and isn’t obligatory or mandatory.

I’m not responding again; you can bank the attention you’ve already got and am sure you’ll have some galaxy brain response but I’m not really interested.

  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...