TV Licence article Discussion

stevemcol

Sorry all, I can't argue with any firm basis, since I've only ever been on one side of the fence, that is a content licence holder. If legit non-licence holders are harassed, that's unfortunate.

If I was one of the legit non-licence holders, I guess I would permanently remove my aeriel and any RF receiver equipment and invite the TVL guys round for a brew and a chat.

You'll probably point out that that won't work either.
I'm not here to defend bureaucracy.

[Deleted User]

stevemcol wrote: »

I've absolutely no idea.

So, were your comments about detection hypothetical, as in they could use detection, rather than they do use it?

[Deleted User]

stevemcol wrote: »

If legit non-licence holders are harassed, that's unfortunate.

Unfortunate? :shocked:

I guess I would permanently remove my aerial

Why should you have to spend money, having the aerial removed?

If you stopped driving, would you have the garage demolished?

and any RF receiver equipment

How would you watch BluRays, DVDs, Video Tapes and the like?

and invite the TVL guys round for a brew and a chat.

A gentleman, who goes by the username of M Shakey, tried that, and ended up in court, on a trumped up charge.

stevemcol

Sorry guys, I'll leave you to it, it's not an obsession of mine. I was just drawn in by Martin's headline on the site front page and I have a few loose opinions.

Enjoy the debate.

System

stevemcol wrote: »

They can. One easy method is to detect leakage from the IF oscillator.

OMG seriously, that was years ago with the old analogue televisions. If they had the tech today to detect the "evaders" the BBC wouldn't have turned down a freedom of information request.......................making sure the the public knows they exist would be the best PR they could have

System

stevemcol wrote:

If we all find ways to wriggle out of paying, the BBC would disappear in its current guise.

But if the BBC is as great as they and their PR colleagues make out why would it disappear...................unless you know the reality is the public would rather do without them given the choice

[Deleted User]

TheWise1 wrote: »

But if the BBC is as great as they and their PR colleagues make out why would it disappear

Exactly.

If the BBC is as wonderful as we are lead to believe, people would happily fund it, on a voluntary basis.

System

stevemcol wrote: »

The BBC is the envy of the world. Their TV & Radio programming is predominantly of the highest standard and....NO ADVERTS :j.

Once again, OMG. You are another defination of the word BEEBOID

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=beeboid

The only people that believe that are people like yourself but then again you go on to admit the BBC would disappear without forcing people to fund it so you contradict yourself.

stevemcol wrote: »

I'm more than happy to pay my TV licence on that basis.

I think we all know that, I've not given them a penny in my life and never will. It must be over £2 grand now

stevemcol

TheWise1 wrote: »

Once again, OMG. You are another defination of the word BEEBOID

I enjoyed that so much I've changed my signature. I've never had a label before and I think it looks good on me!

Cornucopia

The thing I like about that definition is that it does place supporting the BBC as a political position.

Some [STRIKE]people[/STRIKE] Beeboids would have you believe that supporting the BBC is some kind of moral imperative or timeless fact, when it's clearly nothing of the sort.