|
|
Post by Fuzznuts on Aug 30, 2006 13:24:50 GMT -5
Not really.
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Aug 30, 2006 13:28:09 GMT -5
Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fuzznuts on Aug 30, 2006 13:33:33 GMT -5
Why what?
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Aug 30, 2006 13:40:10 GMT -5
Why should I put time and effort into poking fun at Chrisfan when that still gets the job done...
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Aug 30, 2006 13:41:52 GMT -5
Well if the intent is to actually insult me, then it doesn't get the job done. That's why. The insult comes through the lack of effort - not the post itself. That's just weak. You can do better than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fuzznuts on Aug 30, 2006 13:45:56 GMT -5
He never said he was insulting you, just poking fun. There's a difference
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Aug 30, 2006 13:49:43 GMT -5
I did write insult first but changed it poking fun...if I wanted to insult Chrisfan the effort would've been brunged.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Aug 30, 2006 14:02:23 GMT -5
But it sucks that JAC got Chrisfanned. Better luck to that guy last time.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Aug 30, 2006 14:06:16 GMT -5
I love my XM Radio. I think it is beyond obvious that terrestrial radio beats the shit out of satellite radio as far as money goes. JAC wasn't really talking about that. Is there anyone here who would argue that Satellite kicks the shit out of anything as far as content goes? Because that's all JAC said.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Aug 30, 2006 14:26:52 GMT -5
I love my XM Radio. I think it is beyond obvious that terrestrial radio beats the shit out of satellite radio as far as money goes. JAC wasn't really talking about that. Is there anyone here who would argue that Satellite kicks the shit out of anything as far as content goes? Because that's all JAC said. Creative interpretation Ken. |
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Aug 30, 2006 14:34:30 GMT -5
Ah, but that's a response to an argument you created, Chrisfan:
Jac: It would be nice if satellite were an agent to spur growth and quality in terrestrial radio...they'd better get movin', though, cuz as it stands Satellite is "where it's at" now. - talking about content.
Chrisfan: I'm not sure that I agree with you that satellite is "where it's at" Jac. - talking about subcounts and shareholders and all sorts of shit, none of which have anything to do with content. Furthermore, your discussion hanged on future predictions on the current satellite business model...not at all what JAC was talking about. You were being argumentative. There just was no argument to be made until you baited JAC into one.
But hey, this is where I stop. I am not getting Chrisfanned, no way.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Aug 30, 2006 14:39:56 GMT -5
I didn't bait - I responded.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fuzznuts on Aug 30, 2006 14:48:29 GMT -5
Hooray for Semantics!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Aug 30, 2006 15:03:20 GMT -5
Just to stay on topic, I don't listen to either satelite or terrestrial radio outside of NPR occastionally. Though I think satelite will eventually win out because it will probably become more customizable....the potential exists to create almost a completely personalized station. Terrerestrial radio doesn't have that potential.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Aug 30, 2006 15:06:27 GMT -5
But Mantis, do you analyze radio audiences? Do you? Shut the fuck up then.  |
|
