Author Topic: Game Show Garbage Inducts Golden-road.net (Read 33273 times)

jjman920 · « **Reply #30 on:** January 28, 2013, 08:19:33 AM »

It seems like because a couple names were cited as examples of the extremity of G-R.net\'s membership people now want to cry foul because a couple users don\'t make up the whole majority. I do agree with that, however the site didn\'t gain the rep they did for no reason. That\'s all I\'m saying. Don\'t double back now because the author of the article\'s integrity is being questioned. I feel like the man was speaking the truth because what he wrote about is the tone I get every time I log onto that site. Of course that\'s not the case with the entire membership and I don\'t feel like that\'s what he was getting at with the article. But we all know the old saying...it only takes a couple bad apples to spoil the bunch.

When you stoop to the level of the people you are supposedly ripping against, does that make you any better? That\'s the problem. Golden Road is a site with an image problem. It\'s better than years ago, but still the same site where the show is picked apart. And here this article is picking apart the site, quoting another article that took to referring to members as \"ass-burgers.\" Golden Road may have been (and still is) annoying for their level of fandom, but I hardly think personal attacks making fun of a serious disorder is their style. At that point, you go from stooping to their level to stooping even lower. That article put in a piece about the recap guide at the site and how he does recaps. What in the blue blazes does that have to do with the tone of the site? That seemed like insulting for the sake of insulting. And while it takes a couple of bad apples to spoil the bunch, do you really think it\'s fair to say that it takes a couple of bad apples (who may or may not still post at the site) to say the the members of the site aren\'t sympathetic at all and would care about Pay the Rent more than the death of someone? The site gained a reputation, but it didn\'t get a reputation for being cold and heartless.

The site laid their bed and must lay in it, but there is and isn\'t a way to go about criticizing them and the first article wasn\'t the way.

JMFabiano · « **Reply #31 on:** January 28, 2013, 12:19:27 PM »

OK, I am a fan of GSG, even though it seems to some here it should be a point of shame for me. As a MSTie, I just find some appeal to cheesy or bad things being riffed on...hence my similar fandom for: Cheap Seats, Wrestlecrap (the not-so-smarky articles, that is), and the now-late WWE Are You Serious? I draw the line at Faux Pause, of course.

That said, I am kind of in the middle as far as my feelings about this situation. \"Smart marks\" in any form of fandom do get on my nerves, and while they have points more often than not, they still take a lot of the fun out of things. Heck, that\'s why I don\'t watch current wrestling that much, unless I\'m with a friend who\'s watching it. Should they be schooled from time to time? Heck yeah! But on the other hand, I can see how the G-R induction was a powder keg as well.

And again, I personally think some of the G-R-type overreactions and criticisms are overrated. It\'s not 1979 anymore, face it. The core of the show is still there, it\'s not like Fremantle hasn\'t done worse to other classic formats. And the theme weeks and guest stars don\'t bother me as much, really.

clemon79 · « **Reply #32 on:** January 28, 2013, 01:48:10 PM »

and a thought process that the fans had gotten their revenge for Roger\'s forced ousting.

Proof or Not Real. Seriously. I want one shred of proof from you that anyone backstage tried to blame the intent for that incident on Roger\'s dismissal.

That was when they decided there needed to be a slew of new and strange prizes to prevent it from happening again.

Which was a brilliant idea, since it\'s not a game of memorization and was never intended to be. I think they just didn\'t realize the issue needed to be addressed so urgently.

clemon79 · « **Reply #33 on:** January 28, 2013, 01:50:03 PM »

fandom

Christ, how I hate this word.

JasonA1 · « **Reply #34 on:** January 28, 2013, 01:53:29 PM »

and a thought process that the fans had gotten their revenge for Roger\'s forced ousting.

Proof or Not Real. Seriously. I want one shred of proof from you that anyone backstage tried to blame the intent for that incident on Roger\'s dismissal.

Ctrl+F on the f-word in this Esquire interview, and you\'ll see the part Dan\'s referring to. Whether that counts as proof is the reader\'s call.

-Jason

clemon79 · « **Reply #35 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:05:58 PM »

Ctrl+F on the f-word in this Esquire interview, and you\'ll see the part Dan\'s referring to. Whether that counts as proof is the reader\'s call.

Well, that\'s more evidence than I thought I was going to get, though I suggest Drew\'s solitary say-so being augmented into \"the general reaction backstage\" gets me at least one or two squares on your average Benfield Bingo card.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #36 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:07:33 PM »

apparently, Drew -- who had invited them to a meal -- kept going on and on about Second Life and wanted little to do with discussing Price), Marc made the decision to not try and establish contacts/friendships with those who replaced Roger. That was his decision.

If someone\'s paying for my dinner, I think its polite to discuss things they might be interested in.

Put it this way--if I was to invite a few members on this board to dinner, the last thing I would want is to be peppered with questions about blackjack and craps.

TLEberle · « **Reply #37 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:29:47 PM »

\"Smart marks\" in any form of fandom do get on my nerves, and while they have points more often than not, they still take a lot of the fun out of things.

And GSL87 hates \"average casual viewers,\" so you\'re in his company. Congratulations.

chris319 · « **Reply #38 on:** January 28, 2013, 02:36:28 PM »

I understand they stopped down while they decided what to do. Then they did major post on that segment to conceal Terry fielding his bid from the audience; that much is indisputable.

JMFabiano · « **Reply #39 on:** January 28, 2013, 05:18:50 PM »

\"Smart marks\" in any form of fandom do get on my nerves, and while they have points more often than not, they still take a lot of the fun out of things.

And GSL87 hates \"average casual viewers,\" so you\'re in his company. Congratulations.

I never said I HATED them, mind you, nor do I think they\'re all like that...the above was meant to describe them at their worst.

Jeremy Nelson · « **Reply #40 on:** January 28, 2013, 07:41:04 PM »

[quote name=\"clemon79\" post=\"303482\" timestamp=\"1359398890\"]

Quote

That was when they decided there needed to be a slew of new and strange prizes to prevent it from happening again.

Which was a brilliant idea, since it\'s not a game of memorization and was never intended to be. I think they just didn\'t realize the issue needed to be addressed so urgently.[/quote]
Really, I\'m surprised more wasn\'t squeezed out of the show in the late 90s/early 2000s. I\'d think that after a while, the frequency of Toaster Breaks, Hooker Furniture, and Libman Wonder Mops would burn them- I recall a few contestants who won their games handily by memorization and would\'ve won more had they made it to the showcase.

MTCesquire · « **Reply #41 on:** January 28, 2013, 11:40:29 PM »

When it was discovered that Roger was fired, and after the meal Marc and John had with Drew (they mentioned it on a Stu\'s Show episode; apparently, Drew -- who had invited them to a meal -- kept going on and on about Second Life and wanted little to do with discussing Price), Marc made the decision to not try and establish contacts/friendships with those who replaced Roger. That was his decision.

Then that\'s on Marc. If he decided that he did not want to continue the site\'s relationship with the show based on the fact that Drew didn\'t want to spend the entire dinner talking about TPIR then he doesn\'t have any right to criticize any changes that have been made since Bob & Roger\'s departure. It\'s like me dating a girl, dumping her, then criticizing about her life choices after the fact. I have no right to intrude on my ex\'s daily habits since she\'s no longer my girl.

Two things I should point out:
* If any of these things had happened while Bob and Roger were in charge (or just Roger), either A) they would\'ve done those in a completely different manner or B) they would\'ve done it the same way and the fans would\'ve joked that they had gone senile.

Bullcrap. The denizens of G-R.net worship anything Barker/Dobkowitz. The show could\'ve switched to an \"American Idol\"-type set and added musical guests between each pricing game and no one would\'ve batted an eye because Emperor Barker would still be reigning over the show and \"The Barker is Right\" regardless. Marc cut the show off, not the other way around as some people over there would like you to think.

* The \"Perfect Bid fiasco\" was a direct retaliation to Golden-Road. It\'s been well established, I think, that a G-R member named Ted (Slauson?) had been the one to give Terry Kneiss that bid (although he later tried to tell him $23,500). Drew\'s reaction to the moment on-camera, and the general reaction backstage, was that of mayhem and a thought process that the fans had gotten their revenge for Roger\'s forced ousting (i.e., there was something kinda hinky and Drew thought it wasn\'t going to air because \"somebody f*cking f*cked us over\"). That was when they decided there needed to be a slew of new and strange prizes to prevent it from happening again.

I know the story. We all do. It\'s just like when \"Press Your Luck\" changed up the board patterns after Michael Larson came through and exploited the hell out of CBS for over $100,000. I don\'t see how this is a bad thing. If anything, it adds variety to the show AND we get to see some pretty cool prizes that people actually want to win. I\'ll take a multimedia prize package that includes a bunch of (crappy) Apple products, a game system with a bunch of games, and a 3D HDTV than a damn living room group.

** Going back to Bob and Roger, Barker would\'ve treated the moment as crowning proof that watching the show every day pays off. You sell the moment as hard as you can and celebrate today; let S&P worry about the legalities tomorrow.

Completely irrelevant to the argument. Barker\'s imagined handling of the situation has nothing to do with G-R.net\'s overreaction to the show since the regime change. My point still stands.

TLEberle · « **Reply #42 on:** January 28, 2013, 11:53:51 PM »

fandom
Christ, how I hate this word.

With what shall we replace it?

clemon79 · « **Reply #43 on:** January 29, 2013, 12:24:31 AM »

With what shall we replace it?

I don\'t care. But in my experience \"fanDOM\" is a word most commonly used by fanBOIZ.

PYLdude · « **Reply #44 on:** January 29, 2013, 12:46:33 AM »

With what shall we replace it?

I don\'t care. But in my experience \"fanDOM\" is a word most commonly used by fanBOIZ.

Isn\'t this making a mountain out of a molehill? I see nothing wrong with \"fandom\" and I\'m not a fanboy (I refuse to spell it any way other than its proper spelling).