-
At the top of tonight's episode of Jeopardy!, Alex once again compared Kerry to Ken Jennings. He's getting as bad at this as Jim Caldwell was about Thom McKee's run on Tic Tac Dough. He's gone, Alex, move along. It's bad enough he's coming back so soon so we can watch Alex foam at Ken every night for 15 weeks during the upcoming elongated Dance, Monkey, Dance Jeopardy! Tournament Of Tournaments.
Can special red categories be far behind?
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:47 PM\']It's bad enough he's coming back so soon so we can watch Alex foam at Ken every night for 15 weeks during the upcoming elongated Dance, Monkey, Dance Jeopardy! Tournament Of Tournaments.
[snapback]70309[/snapback]
[/quote]
I'm sorry, but I can't get past this without cracking up. Post of the day.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:47 PM\']Can special red categories be far behind?
[snapback]70309[/snapback]
[/quote]
Alex will explain when we get to them.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 06:47 PM\']Can special red categories be far behind?
[snapback]70309[/snapback]
[/quote]
Sure, along with the rapping dragon, rapping dragon slayer & Henry Mancini's kiddie theme tune (LOL)!
-
I don't mean to go Zach on you, but that's the wrong TTD. Don's talking about the 85-86 season with Jim Caldwell.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:47 PM\']
Can special red categories be far behind?
[snapback]70309[/snapback]
[/quote]
I'm sure they can't! They'll be "special categories" where any contestant can buzz in and take control......;)
-
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 10:18 PM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:47 PM\']
Can special red categories be far behind?
[snapback]70309[/snapback]
[/quote]
I'm sure they can't! They'll be "special categories" where any contestant can buzz in and take control......;)
[snapback]70333[/snapback]
[/quote]
SHHH!!! Don't give them any ideas!!
-
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 11:18 PM\']I'm sure they can't! They'll be "special categories" where any contestant can buzz in and take control......;)[/quote]
Hey, some people SWEPT categories against Ken.
Just sayin'
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:57 PM\']I'm sorry, but I can't get past this without cracking up. Post of the day.
[snapback]70326[/snapback]
[/quote]
I demand at least an assist on the play. :)
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:47 PM\']At the top of tonight's episode of Jeopardy!, Alex once again compared Kerry to Ken Jennings. He's getting as bad at this as Jim Caldwell was about Thom McKee's run on Tic Tac Dough. He's gone, Alex, move along. It's bad enough he's coming back so soon so we can watch Alex foam at Ken every night for 15 weeks during the upcoming elongated Dance, Monkey, Dance Jeopardy! Tournament Of Tournaments.
Can special red categories be far behind?
[snapback]70309[/snapback]
[/quote]
This is one of the reasons I think that J! might be in some trouble.
Ken just blew the recordbook by SO MUCH that he might be the only thing keeping the show afloat. Yes, it WAS #1 in the syndies, but are people going to watch in the same numbers as pre-Ken once this Ultimate Tournament ends and contestants that clearly can't measure up to even most of the former champions get on week after week?
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 10:09 PM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:47 PM\']Can special red categories be far behind?
[snapback]70309[/snapback]
[/quote]
Alex will explain when we get to them.
[snapback]70327[/snapback]
[/quote]
Oooh! I claim dibs on The Trebek Files!
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 10:40 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:57 PM\']I'm sorry, but I can't get past this without cracking up. Post of the day.
[snapback]70326[/snapback]
[/quote]
I demand at least an assist on the play. :)
[snapback]70341[/snapback]
[/quote]
(reads post in question)
Duly noted. Assist granted. :-)
-
are people going to watch in the same numbers as pre-Ken once this Ultimate Tournament ends and contestants that clearly can't measure up to even most of the former champions get on week after week?
You don't suppose people tune in to play a challenging answer-and-question game, do you? That couldn't be the reason it lasted umpteen years on NBC when the top question value was $100, could it?
-
I'm sure J! will maintain its core fan base that it has over the years. Whether the ratings will be sustained during this tournament is anybody's guess really. Don't be surprised if the ratings go no higher than a 7.5 in the first 2 months. As the tourney progresses, the ratings generally inch upwards by about 5% up untill the finals where a 3-game match would yeild a max of 9.0 at best. I think it's too soon to bring Ken back even if he's back for 3 more months.
As far as special categories going red, not gonna happen. I like Alex's explanations just fine theank you. I don't need a TTD element there. Besides, there's usually at least 2 or 3 of those each week anyways.
-
[quote name=\'starcade\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 10:50 PM\']This is one of the reasons I think that J! might be in some trouble.
Ken just blew the recordbook by SO MUCH that he might be the only thing keeping the show afloat. Yes, it WAS #1 in the syndies, but are people going to watch in the same numbers as pre-Ken once this Ultimate Tournament ends and contestants that clearly can't measure up to even most of the former champions get on week after week?
[snapback]70342[/snapback]
[/quote]
You're kidding me, right?
If the show gave away canned hams for prizes, it would still be a top rated show. You need to understand that contestants don't come on just for the cash. There is an unwritten glory that comes with being a J! champion. Hell, for what it's worth, there's glory in just making it on the show. (There, that should take care of flattery for Michi-Matt!).
Number 2 syndie show consistently for most of it's 20 years. And I would predict (based on how I see my affiliate audience respond to the show) at the top of the charts for many more.
-
[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 04:50 AM\']
As far as special categories going red, not gonna happen. I like Alex's explanations just fine theank you. I don't need a TTD element there. Besides, there's usually at least 2 or 3 of those each week anyways.
[snapback]70373[/snapback]
[/quote]
J! actually did have one special category, i.e. one that played a tad different from usual categories like those on TTD. It didn't have a red background however. It was called "(insert name of category) BONUS". It appeared a few times in the 1997-98 season in the DJ! round. They were two part answers. A contestant getting one part right could try for the second part to try for double the value of the clue, or could pass. Going further and getting it wrong lost the money earned in the first part. Passing or missing gave the other players a chance to try one or both parts.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 11:09 PM\']
are people going to watch in the same numbers as pre-Ken once this Ultimate Tournament ends and contestants that clearly can't measure up to even most of the former champions get on week after week?
You don't suppose people tune in to play a challenging answer-and-question game, do you? That couldn't be the reason it lasted umpteen years on NBC when the top question value was $100, could it?
[snapback]70365[/snapback]
[/quote]
Alex ON:
"Ooooooh! That's so close!! But I'm told the judges cannot accept that answer because it was improperly phrased, despite the fact that you DID phrase it in the form of a question. An example of an acceptable answer might be: 'why did Jeopardy! last so long?,' or 'what can be attributed to Jeopardy's success?' The good news is, however, that you STILL remain in control of the board, so 'pick up your signaling button...' "
Alex OFF.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 11:28 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 10:40 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:57 PM\']I'm sorry, but I can't get past this without cracking up. Post of the day.
[snapback]70326[/snapback]
[/quote]
I demand at least an assist on the play. :)
[snapback]70341[/snapback]
[/quote]
(reads post in question)
Duly noted. Assist granted. :-)
[snapback]70355[/snapback]
[/quote]
Absolutely. I couldn't have done it without his post of a few days ago.
Now! Here's what I'd to see in a future contestant interview with Kerry:
ALEX==What's it like to possibly be the next Ken Jennings?
KERRY==I don't know. What's it like to possibly be the next Art Fleming?
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 10:29 AM\']
Absolutely. I couldn't have done it without his post of a few days ago.
Now! Here's what I'd to see in a future contestant interview with Kerry:
ALEX==What's it like to possibly be the next Ken Jennings?
KERRY==I don't know. What's it like to possibly be the next Art Fleming?
[snapback]70406[/snapback]
[/quote]
Line.....of....the....day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 10:40 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:57 PM\']I'm sorry, but I can't get past this without cracking up. Post of the day.
[snapback]70326[/snapback]
[/quote]I demand at least an assist on the play. :)[snapback]70341[/snapback]
[/quote]
I'm currently compiling the Most Amusing Posts of 2004, and your name comes up enough. Would you please give the rest of us a chance to be funny?
Two Trebekkies walk into a bar...
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 07:29 AM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 11:28 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 10:40 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 07:57 PM\']I'm sorry, but I can't get past this without cracking up. Post of the day.
[snapback]70326[/snapback]
[/quote]
I demand at least an assist on the play. :)
[snapback]70341[/snapback]
[/quote]
(reads post in question)
Duly noted. Assist granted. :-)
[snapback]70355[/snapback]
[/quote]
Absolutely. I couldn't have done it without his post of a few days ago.
Now! Here's what I'd to see in a future contestant interview with Kerry:
ALEX==What's it like to possibly be the next Ken Jennings?
KERRY==I don't know. What's it like to possibly be the next Art Fleming?
[snapback]70406[/snapback]
[/quote]
Oh, what I wouldn't pay to see that happen!
If she could make a shot about Alex's first marriage, it'd be even better. If she mentions Pitfall, she's a goddess. ;-)
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 06:26 AM\'][quote name=\'starcade\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 10:50 PM\']This is one of the reasons I think that J! might be in some trouble.
Ken just blew the recordbook by SO MUCH that he might be the only thing keeping the show afloat. Yes, it WAS #1 in the syndies, but are people going to watch in the same numbers as pre-Ken once this Ultimate Tournament ends and contestants that clearly can't measure up to even most of the former champions get on week after week?
[snapback]70342[/snapback]
[/quote]
You're kidding me, right?
If the show gave away canned hams for prizes, it would still be a top rated show. You need to understand that contestants don't come on just for the cash. There is an unwritten glory that comes with being a J! champion. Hell, for what it's worth, there's glory in just making it on the show. (There, that should take care of flattery for Michi-Matt!).
Number 2 syndie show consistently for most of it's 20 years. And I would predict (based on how I see my affiliate audience respond to the show) at the top of the charts for many more.
[snapback]70377[/snapback]
[/quote]
You've explained why people would still like to go on the show.
But every contestant from here to infinity is going to be compared to someone who did something so nigh unreachable that I do think a lot of people (after Ultimate), are just going to give up and say "Why bother? They'll never find another Ken..."
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 01:09 AM\']
are people going to watch in the same numbers as pre-Ken once this Ultimate Tournament ends and contestants that clearly can't measure up to even most of the former champions get on week after week?
You don't suppose people tune in to play a challenging answer-and-question game, do you? That couldn't be the reason it lasted umpteen years on NBC when the top question value was $100, could it?
[snapback]70365[/snapback]
[/quote]
Wouldn't work in today's day and age without the history.
That's why they even had to eventually double the dollars and do a million-dollar tournament previous to this one.
-
[quote name=\'starcade\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 08:51 PM\']But every contestant from here to infinity is going to be compared to someone who did something so nigh unreachable that I do think a lot of people (after Ultimate), are just going to give up and say "Why bother? They'll never find another Ken..."
[/quote]
And without going in circles on this with you, i'm just going to say
You're wrong.
There are THOUSANDS of people who would give anything for a crack at an unlimited payoff for being intelligent and a good gamesman. THOUSANDS today. THOUSANDS years from now. And not one of them will give a dang that they're being compared to a Mormon.
Don't believe me? Just check the records for the number of people who try out for the show every year, and don't even come close to passing the test. That pool is olympic-sized.
Oh, and......see below.
-
[quote name=\'starcade\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 08:52 PM\']Wouldn't work in today's day and age without the history.
That's why they even had to eventually double the dollars and do a million-dollar tournament previous to this one.
[/quote]
Good lord. You're obviously proving you don't work in television. And you're certainly proving that you wouldn't cut it as a program executive.
-
[quote name=\'starcade\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 08:52 PM\']That's why they even had to eventually double the dollars and do a million-dollar tournament previous to this one.
[/quote]
So...if the top dollar value on Wheel of Fortune was reduced from $5000 to $500...people wouldn't watch?
If the maximum an NFL player could make was $35,000...but they still played just as hard as they do now...people wouldn't watch?
People watch games...to watch games. Money is a nice little sidebar.
-
As far as there not being another Ken, I'm sure there are others with the same depth of knowledge and ability. If Ken had tried out ten years ago, he would have been just another fantastic undefeated champ, with not enough money to quit his job.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 08:37 PM\'][quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Jan 6 2005, 11:18 PM\']I'm sure they can't! They'll be "special categories" where any contestant can buzz in and take control......;)[/quote]
Hey, some people SWEPT categories against Ken.
Just sayin'
[snapback]70339[/snapback]
[/quote]
That must've been one of the ones I missed ;-p
Who was it?
-
I've said it before: If all audiences want to see is people potentially winning large sums of money, explain to me why state lottery shows aren't the biggest thing on television.
-
[quote name=\'MyCapableAssistant\' date=\'Jan 8 2005, 10:05 PM\']That must've been one of the ones I missed ;-p
Who was it?
[snapback]70632[/snapback]
[/quote]
For your sake, I hope you're kidding! :D
-
[quote name=\'MCArroyo1\' date=\'Jan 8 2005, 09:11 PM\'][quote name=\'MyCapableAssistant\' date=\'Jan 8 2005, 10:05 PM\']That must've been one of the ones I missed ;-p
Who was it?
[snapback]70632[/snapback]
[/quote]
For your sake, I hope you're kidding! :D
[snapback]70639[/snapback]
[/quote]
I may never tell ! :-D
OF COURSE I am! It was one of the
Greatest eps, ever... You DO remember me telling you that...
... DONT'CHA Matt??
-
[quote name=\'Dsmith\' date=\'Jan 8 2005, 02:43 AM\'][quote name=\'starcade\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 08:52 PM\']That's why they even had to eventually double the dollars and do a million-dollar tournament previous to this one.
[/quote]
So...if the top dollar value on Wheel of Fortune was reduced from $5000 to $500...people wouldn't watch?
If the maximum an NFL player could make was $35,000...but they still played just as hard as they do now...people wouldn't watch?
People watch games...to watch games. Money is a nice little sidebar.
[snapback]70526[/snapback]
[/quote]
People shouldn't watch Wheel anyway, given the morons who play it.
As far as people watching games to watch games, then explain why, save about four syndie shows and TPiR, the genre is essentially dead. People aren't watching games now like they were in 1975. *those were the days*
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jan 8 2005, 10:24 PM\']I've said it before: If all audiences want to see is people potentially winning large sums of money, explain to me why state lottery shows aren't the biggest thing on television.
[snapback]70635[/snapback]
[/quote]
Chris, because they're _STATE_ shows.
If a national lottery (not a multi-state one, but a true national one) with commensurate jackpots and a commensurate TV game were created, then I think people would watch for that reason.
-
I thought there was a law against broadcasting lotteries. Are state lotteries exceptions?
-
The rule is that the stations in their state of origin can only air their state lottery show and results. Therefore, that's why one could legally see the Illinois Lottery numbers and subsequent shows, but it couldn't air in another state. Another example: Only Powerball states could air PIM (and there's about 15 of them).
-
[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Jan 10 2005, 10:44 PM\'] Therefore, that's why one could legally see the Illinois Lottery numbers and subsequent shows, but it couldn't air in another state.
[snapback]70832[/snapback]
[/quote]
Explain to me why "Illinois Instant Riches" was seen on the Superstation feed of WGN; not to mention their lotto drawings, which still air.
-
Pretty easy.....
There was only one feed most of the time. The only exceptions are now when WB is on, and several years ago when the national feed was first added because of syndication issues with some programs. But the lottery has been there since I first got cable in 1981.
-
[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 11:14 AM\']Pretty easy.....
There was only one feed most of the time. The only exceptions are now when WB is on, and several years ago when the national feed was first added because of syndication issues with some programs. But the lottery has been there since I first got cable in 1981.[/quote]
Are you not even capable of realizing that you contradicted yourself? You're saying that the Illinois lottery information couldn't legally be seen in any other state, yet you freely acknowledge that WGN showed it on their national superstation feed.
The much simpler answer is that there's precious little interest in a lottery program in any state other than the one where the lottery actually takes place. I would be astonished to find that there was any actual regulation forbidding it.
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' date=\'Jan 7 2005, 07:25 PM\']
[snapback]70486[/snapback][/right]
And how much does the Malcolm Jackpot stand at now?
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 12:40 PM\'][quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 11:14 AM\']Pretty easy.....
There was only one feed most of the time. The only exceptions are now when WB is on, and several years ago when the national feed was first added because of syndication issues with some programs. But the lottery has been there since I first got cable in 1981.[/quote]
Are you not even capable of realizing that you contradicted yourself? You're saying that the Illinois lottery information couldn't legally be seen in any other state, yet you freely acknowledge that WGN showed it on their national superstation feed.
The much simpler answer is that there's precious little interest in a lottery program in any state other than the one where the lottery actually takes place. I would be astonished to find that there was any actual regulation forbidding it.
[snapback]70901[/snapback]
[/quote]
In reference to broadcast only. In other words, using WGN as an example, they can only post Illinois state lottery numbers (but not Indiana, even though a portion is in the viewing area). In East Texas, there's a really weird situation, with stations in Texas and Louisiana. Both are lottery states, but can only post results of their own state. And as if that isn't bad enough, Texas is a MegaMillions state, Louisiana is a PowerBall state. And while one could legally get results for both states, you have to turn to one of three Shreveport stations for LA, but KLTV 7 is the sole Texas station to turn for the Texas Lottery in the area.
Understand that the FCC does not regulate cable programming. That's why WGN can broadcast Illinois numbers on the "superstation" feed.
-
[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 05:02 PM\']In other words, using WGN as an example, they can only post Illinois state lottery numbers (but not Indiana, even though a portion is in the viewing area).
[snapback]70945[/snapback]
[/quote]
I've noticed that in Illinois now, but that wasn't always the case. I coulda sworn that Indiana lottery numbers used to be posted on some stations. Was this "rule," if it exists, implemented recently?
EDIT: Huh. WBBM just showed Indiana lottery numbers...
-
[quote name=\'MCArroyo1\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 07:10 PM\'][quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 05:02 PM\']In other words, using WGN as an example, they can only post Illinois state lottery numbers (but not Indiana, even though a portion is in the viewing area).
[snapback]70945[/snapback]
[/quote]
I've noticed that in Illinois now, but that wasn't always the case. I coulda sworn that Indiana lottery numbers used to be posted on some stations. Was this "rule," if it exists, implemented recently?
[snapback]70952[/snapback]
[/quote]
The Philly-based 10PM and 11PM EST newscasts, or at least some of them, show the PA, NJ, and DE lottery results for that day. They've been doing it for years.
-
[quote name=\'MCArroyo1\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 07:10 PM\'][quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 05:02 PM\']In other words, using WGN as an example, they can only post Illinois state lottery numbers (but not Indiana, even though a portion is in the viewing area).
[snapback]70945[/snapback]
[/quote]
I've noticed that in Illinois now, but that wasn't always the case. I coulda sworn that Indiana lottery numbers used to be posted on some stations. Was this "rule," if it exists, implemented recently?
[snapback]70952[/snapback]
[/quote]
Been there for several years before I took my classes (late 80s). It's an FCC rule. If the station was licensed to a city in Indiana, then the station could post Indiana lottery numbers, but could not post Illinois numbers. Now, I have heard of cases where some numbers were disseminated via national radio or TV networks. But that tends to be few and far between.
-
[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Jan 11 2005, 04:43 PM\']Been there for several years before I took my classes (late 80s). It's an FCC rule. If the station was licensed to a city in Indiana, then the station could post Indiana lottery numbers, but could not post Illinois numbers. Now, I have heard of cases where some numbers were disseminated via national radio or TV networks. But that tends to be few and far between.
[snapback]70957[/snapback]
[/quote]
This is the FCC regulation in question, excerpted from the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 73, section 73.1211...
(a) No licensee of an AM, FM, television, or Class A television
broadcast station, except as in paragraph © of this section, shall
broadcast any advertisement of or information concerning any lottery,
gift enterprise, or similar scheme, offering prizes dependent in whole
or in part upon lot or chance, or any list of the prizes drawn or
awarded by means of any such lottery, gift enterprise or scheme, whether
said list contains any part or all of such prizes.
(Paragraph (b) is basically an enumeration of reasons why the FCC might or might not consider something a lottery.)
© The provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section shall
not apply to an advertisement, list of prizes or other information
concerning:
(1) A lottery conducted by a State acting under the authority of
State law which is broadcast by a radio or television station licensed
to a location in that State or any other State which conducts such a
lottery.
(2) also exempts not-for-profit fishing contests, (3) exempts Indian gambling, (4) exempts certain other lotteries conducted by not-for-profit and/or commercial organizations that are allowed and/or not prohibited by state laws.
Now, as I read ©(1), any TV station located in a state which has a state lottery is allowed to broadcast results of any state's lottery. So Chicago stations can broadcast Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin results. Philadelphia stations can broadcast Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware results. But Las Vegas stations can't broadcast California results, since there's no state lottery in Nevada.
-
There was only one feed most of the time. The only exceptions are now when WB is on, and several years ago when the national feed was first added because of syndication issues with some programs.
I have a TVGuide from Chicago from 1993, and it lists the weekend version of "Caesar's Challenge" on Channel 9 (WGN) that weekend. That was another show which was blacked out of the superstation feed because it never aired in my area.
The EOTVGS even mentions that a weekend version of the show was seen in LA, but it must have been seen in a few other cities as well. I can't figure out why *that* would be blocked off the superstation feed though...if they were worried about it competing with whatever other stations had it, "Match Game" '98 was carried on that feed, so that must have been competing. Oh well...
-
Anyways, BACK TO THE TOPIC......
If Jeopardy really thinks they are going to get #1 ratings for this upcoming tourney, I think they are wrong. 5 weeks is gonna make for a helluva long tournament, and people are going to get tired of waiting for the finals.
It should have been shortened to 50 or 100, 150 is just too damn many.
How many 5 times champions were there in the 5 time champion era?
-
[quote name=\'passwordplus\' date=\'Jan 12 2005, 12:39 PM\']Anyways, BACK TO THE TOPIC......
[/quote]
If a decent conversation manages to deviate itself from the mainstream; I; for one don't see the harm in it.