-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
A Fun Boxing Match
- Thread starter toddohio
- Start date
C
CinnamonRoll
Guest
I've never seen, met, or talked to either of them, other than pictures of Elizabeth on he site, but I'm gonna go with Elizabeth.
She seems fiesty.
> Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
>
> I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for charity.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Because you dance to disco but you still like rock.</P>
She seems fiesty.
> Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
>
> I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for charity.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Because you dance to disco but you still like rock.</P>
G
GaryThompson
Guest
FIVE WORDS WHEN IT COMES TO MY PAL, ELIZABETH.
GO AHEAD...MAKE HER DAY.
IT'LL BE YOUR LAST.
> I've never seen, met, or talked to either of them, other
> than pictures of Elizabeth on he site, but I'm gonna go with
> Elizabeth.
> She seems fiesty.
>
> > Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> > between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
> >
> > I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for
> charity.
> >
>
GO AHEAD...MAKE HER DAY.
IT'LL BE YOUR LAST.
> I've never seen, met, or talked to either of them, other
> than pictures of Elizabeth on he site, but I'm gonna go with
> Elizabeth.
> She seems fiesty.
>
> > Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> > between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
> >
> > I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for
> charity.
> >
>
Who are they?
> Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
>
> I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for charity.
>
> Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
>
> I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for charity.
>
> Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
>
> I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for charity.
>
You know, that would be worth the cost I am going to be shelling out to go GMA's this year (FM station I help with dont have budget to send me)
<P ID="signature">______________
Program Director/Music Director
X Music Online
The X
Today's Best Music
http://www.xmusiconline.com/</P>
> between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
>
> I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for charity.
>
You know, that would be worth the cost I am going to be shelling out to go GMA's this year (FM station I help with dont have budget to send me)
<P ID="signature">______________
Program Director/Music Director
X Music Online
The X
Today's Best Music
http://www.xmusiconline.com/</P>
N
neutral_observer
Guest
> I feel that it would be a good main event for pay-per-view.
We could use the incredibly talented and capable WWE production team and have them do that lightning effect they can do* live on the loser...or the winner, I suppose!
Guess it all depends on the story you want to tell...
*They obviously don't create real lightning...it's a combination of animated "bolts" keyed over a planned and locked-down shot, a light cue involving a simultaneous very quick ducking of most overhead lights and firing of a few strobes, and a pyro cue at the strike site, all properly and amazingly sequenced and timed to the tenth of a second.
We could use the incredibly talented and capable WWE production team and have them do that lightning effect they can do* live on the loser...or the winner, I suppose!
Guess it all depends on the story you want to tell...
*They obviously don't create real lightning...it's a combination of animated "bolts" keyed over a planned and locked-down shot, a light cue involving a simultaneous very quick ducking of most overhead lights and firing of a few strobes, and a pyro cue at the strike site, all properly and amazingly sequenced and timed to the tenth of a second.
GMA 06..ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
> > Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> > between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
> >
> > I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for
> charity.
> >
>
> You know, that would be worth the cost I am going to be
> shelling out to go GMA's this year (FM station I help with
> dont have budget to send me)
>
why would you pay for an industry trade show??<P ID="signature">______________
note to the NAB..satellite radio..its worth paying for!!</P>
> > Who would be willing to see a fun boxing match at GMA
> > between whatzthat and radioeleizabeth?
> >
> > I mean...we could probably raise a lot of money for
> charity.
> >
>
> You know, that would be worth the cost I am going to be
> shelling out to go GMA's this year (FM station I help with
> dont have budget to send me)
>
why would you pay for an industry trade show??<P ID="signature">______________
note to the NAB..satellite radio..its worth paying for!!</P>
R
radioelizabeth
Guest
Re:
whatever whatzthat.
I wouldn't waste my time.
You don't fight fair...and you wear a silly mask.
I'd prefer a worthy opponent instead.
whatever whatzthat.
I wouldn't waste my time.
You don't fight fair...and you wear a silly mask.
I'd prefer a worthy opponent instead.
V
varedhead
Guest
Re:
I have a scripture for all of you:
Proverbs 17:19
"Anyone who loves to quarrel loves sin; anyone who
speaks boastfully invites disaster".
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by varedhead on 12/26/05 10:08 PM.</FONT></P>
I have a scripture for all of you:
Proverbs 17:19
"Anyone who loves to quarrel loves sin; anyone who
speaks boastfully invites disaster".
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by varedhead on 12/26/05 10:08 PM.</FONT></P>
R
radioelizabeth
Guest
Re:
look whatzthat.
You continue to take this personal and make this personal.
This is a discussion board. Just because I challenge your theories and ask you to substantiate your claims, that is not a slam on you.
But you, thread after thread, post after post continue to argue and personalize this.
We will not, and do not agree. That isn't strife, it is life.
This is a RADIO DISCUSSION BOARD.
It's simple. Back your statements or be done with them.
I don't just swing at anyone. I took a swing at your flawed theory...and it couldn't stand up to it.
Deal with that and move on.
<P ID="signature">______________
RADIOELIZABETH
Pleasant, Passionate, Persuasive
www.radioelizabeth.com</P>
look whatzthat.
You continue to take this personal and make this personal.
This is a discussion board. Just because I challenge your theories and ask you to substantiate your claims, that is not a slam on you.
But you, thread after thread, post after post continue to argue and personalize this.
We will not, and do not agree. That isn't strife, it is life.
This is a RADIO DISCUSSION BOARD.
It's simple. Back your statements or be done with them.
I don't just swing at anyone. I took a swing at your flawed theory...and it couldn't stand up to it.
Deal with that and move on.
<P ID="signature">______________
RADIOELIZABETH
Pleasant, Passionate, Persuasive
www.radioelizabeth.com</P>
R
radioelizabeth
Guest
Re:
It's a discussion and debate.
A few personal slams and insults...but that is par for the course whenever you have people involved.
It's not personal. Or at least, it need not be.
It's a discussion and debate.
A few personal slams and insults...but that is par for the course whenever you have people involved.
It's not personal. Or at least, it need not be.
Re:
Your last reply "Yes, this post is personal"
And you scream that posts shouldn't be person.
Since when is it personal to notice that you and Neutral Observer
spent your Christmas day challenging everyone. Like you
said "This is a RADIO DISCUSSION BOARD." We can see your posts.
The problem is if you don't agree than it's not worth
discussing, you monopolize every converstation and you
send personal remarks and when you receive the same back, you
are aghast! "How dare you be personal"(said in a high prissy Scarlett
O'Hara voice)
I will stand behind what I wrote. You are the one who won't let it
drop and you continue to personally attack my character and knowledge.
Suggesting I should take lessons from you and Neutral Observer..HAH.
So you are a voice on Sirius radio, good accomplishment. Having a
great voice is an asset but having a warm personality and getting along
with people is worth far more, that I understand is a real weakness for you.
Spend your time doing something than emailing me back, Please!!!<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by whatzthat on 12/26/05 10:46 PM.</FONT></P>
Your last reply "Yes, this post is personal"
And you scream that posts shouldn't be person.
Since when is it personal to notice that you and Neutral Observer
spent your Christmas day challenging everyone. Like you
said "This is a RADIO DISCUSSION BOARD." We can see your posts.
The problem is if you don't agree than it's not worth
discussing, you monopolize every converstation and you
send personal remarks and when you receive the same back, you
are aghast! "How dare you be personal"(said in a high prissy Scarlett
O'Hara voice)
I will stand behind what I wrote. You are the one who won't let it
drop and you continue to personally attack my character and knowledge.
Suggesting I should take lessons from you and Neutral Observer..HAH.
So you are a voice on Sirius radio, good accomplishment. Having a
great voice is an asset but having a warm personality and getting along
with people is worth far more, that I understand is a real weakness for you.
Spend your time doing something than emailing me back, Please!!!<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by whatzthat on 12/26/05 10:46 PM.</FONT></P>
R
radioelizabeth
Guest
Re:
whatzthat wrote:
"The problem is if you don't agree than it's not worth discussing, you monopolize every converstation and you send personal remarks and when you receive the same back, you are aghast!"
I sent you a personal comment in regards to your very unprofessional post about Christmas, and how people choose to spend it.
There are lots of discussions going on on this board now that are worth much more than your issue with me.
I hardly post to every thread...so to say I monopolize is totally without merit. ANYONE can post at anytime. No one monopolizes a board.
And there are actually some using this board to gain insight and not just to toss out false theories or personal slams.
"I will stand behind what I wrote."
But YOU don't. You stand behind a false identity.
"Suggesting I should take lessons from you and Neutral Observer"
Again... misquote. I NEVER said that.
"Having a great voice is an asset but having a warm personality and getting along with people is worth far more, that I understand is a real weakness for you."
No. Actually, it isn't. I've got a great warm personality and get along with lots and lots of people. (Just not you, and that is because you have offended me one too many times). Not that that has anything to do with this.
I'll give you that on this thread, I have been more direct than "diplomatic" with you...but direct is still, just direct.
Really whatzthat... you want the last word... take it. But if you misquote me or misrepresent my posts...expect me to correct you for the sake of those who might be reading our exchange....
whatzthat wrote:
"The problem is if you don't agree than it's not worth discussing, you monopolize every converstation and you send personal remarks and when you receive the same back, you are aghast!"
I sent you a personal comment in regards to your very unprofessional post about Christmas, and how people choose to spend it.
There are lots of discussions going on on this board now that are worth much more than your issue with me.
I hardly post to every thread...so to say I monopolize is totally without merit. ANYONE can post at anytime. No one monopolizes a board.
And there are actually some using this board to gain insight and not just to toss out false theories or personal slams.
"I will stand behind what I wrote."
But YOU don't. You stand behind a false identity.
"Suggesting I should take lessons from you and Neutral Observer"
Again... misquote. I NEVER said that.
"Having a great voice is an asset but having a warm personality and getting along with people is worth far more, that I understand is a real weakness for you."
No. Actually, it isn't. I've got a great warm personality and get along with lots and lots of people.
(Just not you, and that is because you have offended me one too many times). Not that that has anything to do with this.I'll give you that on this thread, I have been more direct than "diplomatic" with you...but direct is still, just direct.
Really whatzthat... you want the last word... take it. But if you misquote me or misrepresent my posts...expect me to correct you for the sake of those who might be reading our exchange....
N
neutral_observer
Guest
Re:
> Since when is it personal to notice that you and Neutral Observer
> spent your Christmas day challenging everyone.
Hunh? I wasn't even home until after dark (as some like to put it)!
> The problem is if you don't agree....
Could you do me, everybody here, and -- ultimately -- yourself a huge favor??
Could you drop the words "agree" and "disagree" from any and all conversation on this board? Or, at least, on this issue?
We're talking about two things here -- radio and marketing principles and moral principles. They're both principles...things that are outside of and beyond any of us. Therefore, "agreement" or "disagreement" between parties is immaterial to the discussion; the issues and principles behind them are what are at issue, not the personalities stating them.
I mean, we're not talking favorite ice cream flavors, here.
If you permanently remove "agree" and "disagree" from your discussions and, thus, your mind, you'll find that you will focus on the actual subject at hand and get better at thinking about and discussing these things.
> ...you monopolize every converstation and you
> send personal remarks and when you receive the same back, you
> are aghast!
Boy, I haven't seen that at all!
Hey...how do you interpret the following question? Is it principle or personal?
"Are you the guy playing 43 currents????"
> Having a great voice is an asset but having a warm personality and
> getting along with people is worth far more, that I understand is a real
> weakness for you.
Now, come on...
Hearsay? Assumption? Gossip? In which unbiblical manner did you come to say that?
I've never met E, but I've been aware of her almost from her earliest crackings of the mic. She's always had a good amount of talent and has clearly worked very hard to maximize it. She's worked in bad situations and good situations, likely learning plenty in each...especially her time in Cleveland during which she worked with (and, I'm sure, learned a ton from) Sue Wilson and Daniel Anstandig. She's talented, she's smart, she's learned, and she's a worker. When you have those characteristics, you cannot help but have very high standards for yourself and expect the same from others. You cannot help but desire and maybe even demand a high-performance environment. When that's the case, a person's traits, motivations, standards, and desires can all be misinterpreted by people who don't share them.
I don't know E, I don't know anybody who does, and I've never heard anything about her. If...IF...you've heard some things, it seems likely to me that they could very well be flat-out misunderstandings.
Now, a guy like you comes along on an internet message board...a guy who obviously has never acquired the knowledge of marketing or this industry that she and others have...and boldly makes a charge of racism against an entire format! She -- rightfully! -- challenges you on that and demands proof. I dispute it and list artists and titles that do fit the format and get played. We both challenge you on programming principles. Then, something really frustrating happens:
You never provide evidence, never acknowledge what does get played, never discuss the programming principles that are brought up from the perspective of someone who should know them, look for "agreement" rather than what is true, and go personal against the both of us, but especially rough on E with what I have to guess is gossip about something probably misunderstood in the first place...which really adds up to a worst-case scenario.
On this board! This is bad...really bad!
I have not seen her go personal. I have seen you go very personal. And that has been way over the line. It must stop.
> Since when is it personal to notice that you and Neutral Observer
> spent your Christmas day challenging everyone.
Hunh? I wasn't even home until after dark (as some like to put it)!
> The problem is if you don't agree....
Could you do me, everybody here, and -- ultimately -- yourself a huge favor??
Could you drop the words "agree" and "disagree" from any and all conversation on this board? Or, at least, on this issue?
We're talking about two things here -- radio and marketing principles and moral principles. They're both principles...things that are outside of and beyond any of us. Therefore, "agreement" or "disagreement" between parties is immaterial to the discussion; the issues and principles behind them are what are at issue, not the personalities stating them.
I mean, we're not talking favorite ice cream flavors, here.
If you permanently remove "agree" and "disagree" from your discussions and, thus, your mind, you'll find that you will focus on the actual subject at hand and get better at thinking about and discussing these things.
> ...you monopolize every converstation and you
> send personal remarks and when you receive the same back, you
> are aghast!
Boy, I haven't seen that at all!
Hey...how do you interpret the following question? Is it principle or personal?
"Are you the guy playing 43 currents????"
> Having a great voice is an asset but having a warm personality and
> getting along with people is worth far more, that I understand is a real
> weakness for you.
Now, come on...
Hearsay? Assumption? Gossip? In which unbiblical manner did you come to say that?
I've never met E, but I've been aware of her almost from her earliest crackings of the mic. She's always had a good amount of talent and has clearly worked very hard to maximize it. She's worked in bad situations and good situations, likely learning plenty in each...especially her time in Cleveland during which she worked with (and, I'm sure, learned a ton from) Sue Wilson and Daniel Anstandig. She's talented, she's smart, she's learned, and she's a worker. When you have those characteristics, you cannot help but have very high standards for yourself and expect the same from others. You cannot help but desire and maybe even demand a high-performance environment. When that's the case, a person's traits, motivations, standards, and desires can all be misinterpreted by people who don't share them.
I don't know E, I don't know anybody who does, and I've never heard anything about her. If...IF...you've heard some things, it seems likely to me that they could very well be flat-out misunderstandings.
Now, a guy like you comes along on an internet message board...a guy who obviously has never acquired the knowledge of marketing or this industry that she and others have...and boldly makes a charge of racism against an entire format! She -- rightfully! -- challenges you on that and demands proof. I dispute it and list artists and titles that do fit the format and get played. We both challenge you on programming principles. Then, something really frustrating happens:
You never provide evidence, never acknowledge what does get played, never discuss the programming principles that are brought up from the perspective of someone who should know them, look for "agreement" rather than what is true, and go personal against the both of us, but especially rough on E with what I have to guess is gossip about something probably misunderstood in the first place...which really adds up to a worst-case scenario.
On this board! This is bad...really bad!
I have not seen her go personal. I have seen you go very personal. And that has been way over the line. It must stop.
R
radioelizabeth
Guest
valiant
wow.
thank you.
elizabeth
wow.
thank you.
elizabeth
G
GaryThompson
Guest
Re:
I feel like I've just witnessed Bruce Lee take on Gary Coleman.
Wow.
Well spoken.
> > Since when is it personal to notice that you and Neutral
> Observer
> > spent your Christmas day challenging everyone.
>
> Hunh? I wasn't even home until after dark (as some like to
> put it)!
>
>
>
>
> > The problem is if you don't agree....
>
> Could you do me, everybody here, and -- ultimately --
> yourself a huge favor??
>
> Could you drop the words "agree" and "disagree" from any and
> all conversation on this board? Or, at least, on this
> issue?
>
> We're talking about two things here -- radio and marketing
> principles and moral principles. They're both
> principles...things that are outside of and beyond any of
> us. Therefore, "agreement" or "disagreement" between
> parties is immaterial to the discussion; the issues and
> principles behind them are what are at issue, not the
> personalities stating them.
>
> I mean, we're not talking favorite ice cream flavors, here.
>
> If you permanently remove "agree" and "disagree" from your
> discussions and, thus, your mind, you'll find that you will
> focus on the actual subject at hand and get better at
> thinking about and discussing these things.
>
>
>
> > ...you monopolize every converstation and you
> > send personal remarks and when you receive the same back,
> you
> > are aghast!
>
> Boy, I haven't seen that at all!
>
> Hey...how do you interpret the following question? Is it
> principle or personal?
>
> "Are you the guy playing 43 currents????"
>
>
>
>
> > Having a great voice is an asset but having a warm
> personality and
> > getting along with people is worth far more, that I
> understand is a real
> > weakness for you.
>
> Now, come on...
>
> Hearsay? Assumption? Gossip? In which unbiblical manner
> did you come to say that?
>
> I've never met E, but I've been aware of her almost from her
> earliest crackings of the mic. She's always had a good
> amount of talent and has clearly worked very hard to
> maximize it. She's worked in bad situations and good
> situations, likely learning plenty in each...especially her
> time in Cleveland during which she worked with (and, I'm
> sure, learned a ton from) Sue Wilson and Daniel Anstandig.
> She's talented, she's smart, she's learned, and she's a
> worker. When you have those characteristics, you cannot
> help but have very high standards for yourself and expect
> the same from others. You cannot help but desire and maybe
> even demand a high-performance environment. When that's the
> case, a person's traits, motivations, standards, and desires
> can all be misinterpreted by people who don't share them.
>
> I don't know E, I don't know anybody who does, and I've
> never heard anything about her. If...IF...you've heard some
> things, it seems likely to me that they could very well be
> flat-out misunderstandings.
>
> Now, a guy like you comes along on an internet message
> board...a guy who obviously has never acquired the knowledge
> of marketing or this industry that she and others have...and
> boldly makes a charge of racism against an entire format!
> She -- rightfully! -- challenges you on that and demands
> proof. I dispute it and list artists and titles that do fit
> the format and get played. We both challenge you on
> programming principles. Then, something really frustrating
> happens:
>
> You never provide evidence, never acknowledge what does get
> played, never discuss the programming principles that are
> brought up from the perspective of someone who should know
> them, look for "agreement" rather than what is true, and go
> personal against the both of us, but especially rough on E
> with what I have to guess is gossip about something probably
> misunderstood in the first place...which really adds up to a
> worst-case scenario.
>
> On this board! This is bad...really bad!
>
> I have not seen her go personal. I have seen you go very
> personal. And that has been way over the line. It must
> stop.
>
I feel like I've just witnessed Bruce Lee take on Gary Coleman.
Wow.
Well spoken.
> > Since when is it personal to notice that you and Neutral
> Observer
> > spent your Christmas day challenging everyone.
>
> Hunh? I wasn't even home until after dark (as some like to
> put it)!
>
>
>
>
> > The problem is if you don't agree....
>
> Could you do me, everybody here, and -- ultimately --
> yourself a huge favor??
>
> Could you drop the words "agree" and "disagree" from any and
> all conversation on this board? Or, at least, on this
> issue?
>
> We're talking about two things here -- radio and marketing
> principles and moral principles. They're both
> principles...things that are outside of and beyond any of
> us. Therefore, "agreement" or "disagreement" between
> parties is immaterial to the discussion; the issues and
> principles behind them are what are at issue, not the
> personalities stating them.
>
> I mean, we're not talking favorite ice cream flavors, here.
>
> If you permanently remove "agree" and "disagree" from your
> discussions and, thus, your mind, you'll find that you will
> focus on the actual subject at hand and get better at
> thinking about and discussing these things.
>
>
>
> > ...you monopolize every converstation and you
> > send personal remarks and when you receive the same back,
> you
> > are aghast!
>
> Boy, I haven't seen that at all!
>
> Hey...how do you interpret the following question? Is it
> principle or personal?
>
> "Are you the guy playing 43 currents????"
>
>
>
>
> > Having a great voice is an asset but having a warm
> personality and
> > getting along with people is worth far more, that I
> understand is a real
> > weakness for you.
>
> Now, come on...
>
> Hearsay? Assumption? Gossip? In which unbiblical manner
> did you come to say that?
>
> I've never met E, but I've been aware of her almost from her
> earliest crackings of the mic. She's always had a good
> amount of talent and has clearly worked very hard to
> maximize it. She's worked in bad situations and good
> situations, likely learning plenty in each...especially her
> time in Cleveland during which she worked with (and, I'm
> sure, learned a ton from) Sue Wilson and Daniel Anstandig.
> She's talented, she's smart, she's learned, and she's a
> worker. When you have those characteristics, you cannot
> help but have very high standards for yourself and expect
> the same from others. You cannot help but desire and maybe
> even demand a high-performance environment. When that's the
> case, a person's traits, motivations, standards, and desires
> can all be misinterpreted by people who don't share them.
>
> I don't know E, I don't know anybody who does, and I've
> never heard anything about her. If...IF...you've heard some
> things, it seems likely to me that they could very well be
> flat-out misunderstandings.
>
> Now, a guy like you comes along on an internet message
> board...a guy who obviously has never acquired the knowledge
> of marketing or this industry that she and others have...and
> boldly makes a charge of racism against an entire format!
> She -- rightfully! -- challenges you on that and demands
> proof. I dispute it and list artists and titles that do fit
> the format and get played. We both challenge you on
> programming principles. Then, something really frustrating
> happens:
>
> You never provide evidence, never acknowledge what does get
> played, never discuss the programming principles that are
> brought up from the perspective of someone who should know
> them, look for "agreement" rather than what is true, and go
> personal against the both of us, but especially rough on E
> with what I have to guess is gossip about something probably
> misunderstood in the first place...which really adds up to a
> worst-case scenario.
>
> On this board! This is bad...really bad!
>
> I have not seen her go personal. I have seen you go very
> personal. And that has been way over the line. It must
> stop.
>
- Status