PAX to Pick-up Pyramid, and Perhaps...

[TimK2003]

PAX-TV released a statement today that they will be airing reruns of Pyramid, beginning with first season episodes on Monday, June 7th, with a possibility of creating NEW episodes in early '05!

The full story can be found at:  http://www.pax.tv/about/press.cfm

It's nice to know that game show fans will still get the opportunity to watch Pyramid, albeit reruns, through the summer with a possibility of new, first run episodes as a mid-season replacement for '05 if the Summer/Fall ratings can be close to the ratings it had this season in first-run syndication.

In other words, the Fat Lady may not have made it to Carnegie Hall to sing yet!  Keep those cards & letters & e-mails to Sony coming in!


-- Tim
A cordial welcome once again to the Joker's Wild...On our last post we crowned a brand new champion














Oh...And there's something about this day....The First of April....Hmmm.....

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'TimK2003\' date=\'Apr 1 2004, 04:19 PM\']
Oh...And there's something about this day....The First of April....Hmmm..... [/quote]
Indeed. Enjoy your stay in The Box.

[digiblader]

This has got to be an April Fool's joke, based on the fact PAX is going down the toilet fast.

[clemon79]

Wow. Nothing gets by you.

[digiblader]

Sorry, but my jokes are really terrible!

Guess I must lack a sense of humour..

Any  GS jokes/fake stories I'd try would probably get me banned because they're not funny.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'digiblader\' date=\'Apr 1 2004, 08:24 PM\'] Sorry, but my jokes are really terrible!

Guess I must lack a sense of humour..

Any  GS jokes/fake stories I'd try would probably get me banned because they're not funny. [/quote]
 No, they'd get you banned because our moderators told everyone not to post them.

[davemackey]

[quote name=\'digiblader\' date=\'Apr 1 2004, 10:24 PM\'] Sorry, but my jokes are really terrible!

Guess I must lack a sense of humour..

Any  GS jokes/fake stories I'd try would probably get me banned because they're not funny. [/quote]
 What's even funnier is certain "board cops" that think they run the place around here.

Lighten up, guys.

[Brandon Brooks]

[quote name=\'davemackey\' date=\'Apr 1 2004, 11:07 PM\'] Lighten up, guys. [/quote]
 Surprisingly, I agree.

I didn't even see the big deal with Chartier's "disgression."  I guess it may be a different story if no one denotes that it is a joke.  But, what really is the harm of someone attempting to get their jollies from posting false stuff and then saying it's false on a day known for it's falsity?

Brandon Brooks

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'Apr 2 2004, 01:34 AM\'] [quote name=\'davemackey\' date=\'Apr 1 2004, 11:07 PM\'] Lighten up, guys. [/quote]
Surprisingly, I agree.

I didn't even see the big deal with Chartier's "disgression."  I guess it may be a different story if no one denotes that it is a joke.  But, what really is the harm of someone attempting to get their jollies from posting false stuff and then saying it's false on a day known for it's falsity?

Brandon Brooks [/quote]
 I don't think anyone had a problem with Chartier's post, until he got sent to the isolation booth...

[J.R.]

[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'Apr 2 2004, 01:34 AM\']
I didn't even see the big deal with Chartier's "disgression."  I guess it may be a different story if no one denotes that it is a joke.  But, what really is the harm of someone attempting to get their jollies from posting false stuff and then saying it's false on a day known for it's falsity?

Brandon Brooks [/quote]
 Because he made it look so real. Right down to the CBS name and trademarks. Television is known for being very cutthroat and cold and news like that with "official" acnoledgement could of triggered a lot of fighting and it made Randy pass out ! If he had did something like "Homestar Runner gets TPIR announcing job", then it would of been okay.

-Joe R.
(PS: ABC is planning a revival of Lange's "$1MCoaL" with "The $50,000,000 Chance of a Lifetime")

[ITSBRY]

But, what really is the harm of someone attempting to get their jollies from posting false stuff and then saying it's false on a day known for it's falsity?

I agree to a point, but sifting through the lame-o fake posts would get really annoying (remember ATGS?) if this were left uncontrolled. It could also generate confusion at a later date or for potential new posters.  I can see it getting out of control without restrictions and rather than try to qualify what's acceptable and what's not, it's better to simply disallow it IMO.

Matt's point about this board being used as reference tool was a very valid one.  I think it makes sense to make everyone aware that knowingly false information that's disguised as real is not welcome here, regardless of whether someone is joking.

Despite, I think the banishment is a little rough...a simple "please don't post inaccurate information" and a removal of the thread would have been sufficient.

ITSBRY
itsbry@juno.com

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'ITSBRY\' date=\'Apr 2 2004, 07:05 AM\'] Despite, I think the banishment is a little rough...a simple "please don't post inaccurate information" and a removal of the thread would have been sufficient.
 [/quote]
 Reasonable people can disagree about whether it was warranted, but the fact is that the policy had been posted, and Chartier went ahead and violated it anyway.  Whoserman had not only the rule available to him, but an example of what happened when it was broken -- and he went ahead and did the exact same thing that Chartier had done!

I'm not always in agreement with Matt and Chris, but this decision wasn't even close.

[ITSBRY]

the policy had been posted, and Chartier went ahead and violated it anyway. Whoserman had not only the rule available to him, but an example of what happened when it was broken -- and he went ahead and did the exact same thing that Chartier had done!

I see your point, but in fairness...I hadn't read the April Fools decree myself.  I came in on 4/1 expecting to see a bunch of lame April Fool's jokes.  It wasn't until I read the Art Sanders post that linked to the other post with the policy that I knew our esteemed moderators had spoken on the subject.  I personally tend to forget that there's something other than "The Big Board" since that's the only board I look at every day.

While ignorance is no excuse, I'm saying that their intent may not have been to violate the rules.  If it wasn't, then I think banishment is too harsh.  Chartier's a pretty respectable poster.  Don't know much about whoserman, but I think benefit of the doubt on the first offense is reasonable.

Perhaps any policy rules like this should be posted in the "broadcast" section of ALL the boards?  The original warning was, I believe, on the "Behind the Scenes" board...I've only looked at that a couple of times.

ITSBRY
itsbry@juno.com

[clemon79]

Every message board like this has (or should have) a seperate area where matters of policy are discussed without getting in the way of the normal conversation. Behind The Scenes is ours, has been ours since Day One, and will continue to be. Chartier and Whoserman both know it, and if they chose not to keep an eye on it, that's the kind of risk they take. Me, I watch the laws to make sure I know when they're changing.

[DrJWJustice]

[quote name=\'ITSBRY\' date=\'Apr 2 2004, 11:24 AM\'] Chartier's a pretty respectable poster. [/quote]
 Based on my (and other people's) dealings with him on another newsgroup, this is up for debate. :-)