Jim March just finished Filming "the debate show"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow! We're talking to the guy that invented the term "troll". I feel honored. Can I have your autograph?

Hey troll if you're not a troll then what's a troll? You came here from another board and registered as a member just so you could say "Get over yourself." If that's not a troll then there's no such thing.

Now go back to usenet and invent some more terms...we're breathlessly awaiting some more kewl netspeak that we can start using here. Congrats on those other words you invented - Newb, L33t, spam...keep up the good work.

brad cook
 
Jim March,

Just wanted to let you know that Comedy Central has already aired at least one episode of "Crossballs". It was on last night. I was in the middle of something real important so I couldn't watch it or know if it was "your" episode. I did flick on and watch the opening of the show and they stated that it's show where "paid actors" "debate" "unsuspecting guests". The logo at the opening labeled it "Crossballs - The Debate Show".

If they do air your visit, do use your lawyer to aquire massive amounts of Viacom money. Please.
 
The caption " REALITY TV: Most lying actors have never been anywhere near a gun because they are lying sissies." is below "camo boy" BUT not as he was dressed for "my" show.

So we still don't know.
 
Contentious discussion is okay. Attacking other Members is not.

EVERYONE please remember that. Knee-jerk declarations of "troll" when a person says something that the rest may not agree with is not taking the High Road.

JAD, check your email.
 
So if "troll" is ten years passe, what is the new term?

Maybe we need to make up a new one so we can scold people on other boards ten years from now.

Vampire? Enters uninvited and bites you after sneaking up on you and sucks up the topic.

Mad Dog? Attacks without warning.

Or perhaps an acronym:

Chump: Comes Here Under Misleading Pretenses

Chimp: Comes Here Intending Malicious Posting

Skunk: Snide Kooky Usually Not Knowledgeable

Scum: Surly Churlish Unfriendly Muckraker
 
Last edited:
Knee-jerk declarations of "troll" when a person says something that the rest may not agree with is not taking the High Road.

There's a difference between disagreement and someone who joined THR for the sole purpose of telling Jim March to "Get a life." Am I wrong in saying that?

brad cook
 
I forgot about Skunky. I guess that one's out of the running.

Maybe Skaank: Snide Kooky Almost Always Not Knowledgeable
 
Am I the only one who thinks this is getting taken a little too seriously? Its little more than a prank show. I understand the claim that it could harm credibility but honestly, ranting and raving and trying to sue is doing far more to damage your reputation than anything. Simply laughing it off would win you a lot of respect.

All I'm saying is us second amendment people dont exactly have great reputations to begin with. It really helps to enforce the "gun nut" image to have someone flip out and try and sue someone just because they pranked you. If you would simply say "Yeah, they got me. But if youre interested in how I really feel here it is..." you would win more people over to your way of thinking. Right now most people who are learning about this whole thing are thinking "Wow, he is crazy" and that automatically harms your reputation and what you believe in.

Why not try and have a sense of humor about the whole thing? The show is pretty funny.
 
Funny? The show is crap, and the antics are borderline dangerous.

Come to think of it everything on comedy central is crap.

Come to think of it everything on TV is crap.
 
Come to think of it everything on TV is crap

I'm with you on that WW, I have much better things to do then waste my time watching the drivel that passes for entertainment today.
 
...sue someone just because they pranked you.
There are a few criteria that need to be met for the work 'prank' to be attached to 'humor' instead of 'harassment'.

--A humorous prank is pulled by friends, not total strangers.

--A humorous prank is not done for profit.

--A humorous prank ends with the Prank-er and the Prank-ee laughiing together and sharing a beverage of choice. (or similar 'all is good between us' gesture)

I'm curious -- when did people started thinking that harassing others for profit was both funny and acceptable.
 
I dont think it counts as harassment when you enter into it willingly. He went on a show to debate someone and got pranked.

All I'm saying is when people start complaining that this show is going to hurt his reputation thats crap. The lawsuit and posting about it on the internet and railing agianst what is nothing more than a prank show is doing far more harm to his reputation then the show ever would.

I cound understand if the show went out of their way to misrepresent what a person believes but thats not the case. I've seen both episodes that have aired and they havent done anything to misrepresent the experts opinion or position. Basicly the whole point of the show is the put you in an unreal situation and see how you'd react for a laugh. Taking it seriously and flying off the handle and taking them to court makes you look insane.

This whole thing is going around on the internet and has hit several forums I post on and this is the only one where people are doing anything other than laughing at the man. And it has nothing to do with his reputation or what he believes in. All people are getting out of this is "Guy gets pranked and gets so pissed he sues". That should tell you something.
 
I disagree these types of people get off on screwing people over...they think it's funny and they don't care what the consequences are to their victims.


I say jam their faces into a s**t pile of legal nastiness and maybe they will learn that it is not cool to behave this way.
 
That should tell you something?

Yes. It does tell me something. It tells me that I'm in good company here.
 
This whole thing is going around on the internet and has hit several forums I post on and this is the only one where people are doing anything other than laughing at the man. And it has nothing to do with his reputation or what he believes in. All people are getting out of this is "Guy gets pranked and gets so pissed he sues". That should tell you something.

And this tells us what? Does it tell us that you hang around in internet forums that are filled with people who's values and morals I would find pathetically deplorable? Does it just point out that there a growing number of people who think it is ok to assault someone with a rock if it is on a "Punk'd" type show?

Someday reality TV is going to kill someone, and you know what? Those same people on your other forums are probably going to think it's "funny" and watch it. Of course, that has nothing to do whatsoever with what is morally right or wrong. Of course, people's opinions never do.
 
This whole thing is going around on the internet and has hit several forums I post on and this is the only one where people are doing anything other than laughing at the man.

It's far better to be principled than popular.

Nice to know at least the gang here realizes that some things ya just gotta stand up against.
 
I dont think it counts as harassment when you enter into it willingly.

"Willingly"?

:rolleyes:

OK. You go into an ice cream shop. You buy lime sherbert ice cream. Or at least, you THINK you do. They neglected to tell you it was spiked with antifreeze. But you have no right to complain, because you were WILLINGLY buying ice cream and you neglected to ask about used automotive fluids, so it's your fault?

:scrutiny:

Suuuure it is.

:barf:

I was sold one thing via a pack o' lies, got something VERY different indeed, something in which they deliberately harmed my *professional* reputation.

But it's my fault? How's that again?
 
Someday reality TV is going to kill someone, and you know what? Those same people on your other forums are probably going to think it's "funny" and watch it. Of course, that has nothing to do whatsoever with what is morally right or wrong. Of course, people's opinions never do.


There was one show I saw which was clip show of reality shows, that had this clip of a scene that could have led to a death.


Several young woman were, on some pretext, brought to this house to spend the night. The show though was about scaring people really, really scaring them.

So as the women were standing in the living room the main lights go off and then some dude wearing a latex mask and waving a machete comes crashing through a window and moves toward the women.

The women were scared of course and the actors and crew had a great laugh at their expense.

This show was filmed in Massachussetts so their was no chance of any of the women to have been armed.

I wonder what would have happened in a freer state than MA. Say Nevada, Colorado, Vermont.....

I think it would be justifiable homicide if the actor in the mask got whacked and I would hope the producers and actors would get indicted as accessories.
 
This show was filmed in Massachussetts so their was no chance of any of the women to have been armed.
Forget just armed with a gun... what if one of the women only looked like a helpless sheep? There are many, many ways to 'neutralize' an attacker that rely only on the will to defend yourself.
 
Darwin Award Candidates...

Someday reality TV is going to kill someone
Since we first saw the previews for "Scare Tactics", my wife and I have been watching this whole craze progress.

And, every time we see another show of this genre advertised, we look at each other, shake our heads, and repeat what we've been saying all along...

"Somebody's going to die before they rein this in." :(

We've never even watched an episode, but I can tell you just from the previews, if I'd been "Punk'd" with a guy at my window at night in a mask with a machete, it would not have ended with anyone laughing... :fire:

Not if, when. Sadly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top