Is the TV Licence fee worth it? Poll results/discussion

mymatebob

dannynixon wrote: »

Is it true that the BBC have stopped showing the England international games? I heard they have lost the rights to Setanta and someone else. If this is true then that is not good. That was probably one of the only things that I really appreciated other than radio from the BBC.

If you mean football then yes.

magyar

ronben wrote: »

Well you did call defiant an idiot, even if its in your opinion its still unfair because he is not able to defend himself, also if everyone were allow to speak as they find as you say then the forum would be in chaos, and you have pointed out time and time again that this forum is not a freedom of speech forum so with that in mind you should be apologising right about now, unless you have been granted a special pass that lest YOU say what you wish with no comeback.

I called him an idiot because I think he acted like an idiot.

He was rude to me from the first time he replied to one of my posts. He called me a troll when I'm clearly not. He constantly harped on about me not living in the UK despite me pointing out that wasn't the case. He accused me (and everyone else!) of being a BBC employee despite being told that wasn't the case. He called the BBC 'Nazis'. His mannerisms were generally sarcastic, offensive, ingnorant and childish.

You're right. If people all behaved like him, the forum would be in chaos. I think the fact he has been banned and I haven't therefore suggests he's the one who was out of order, not me.

Finally, he DOES have the right of reply. He can come back as one of the many AEs which litter this forum, and all he would have to do is send me a PM, identify himself and speak his point. But I suspect he won't.

ShelfStacker_3

ronben wrote: »

Superiority complexes rule once again :T well done.

Do you work for the BBC?

:rolleyes:

No. I work for a supermarket, hence why I call myself "ShelfStacker". Quite why I need to spell that out, I don't know, and quite how I'm the one with a superiority complex (when you consider it valid just to ignore parts of what I say because it's "dross" or "waffle") I'm not sure.

Still no evidence. Still more dodged questions. Come on, I enjoy a good debate.

ShelfStacker_3

ronben wrote: »

Read all my posts and you will see all my answers.

:rolleyes:

I think its a case of you dodging the questions

Which questions have I dodged, then? I know you've certainly dodged the one about whether you have any evidence for your assertion that the BBC is biased (which you're still ignoring, by the way). You've dodged that one quite expertly...

Schwade

To anyone who thinks TVL will leave them alone if you don't watch broadcast TV (since you don't have to pay for a licence), you have NEVER experienced a life without a licence before.

From my past experience and first experience of various people who decided that they would rather spend £134 on a holiday and DVDs, this is what TVL does:

1. continue to send threathening letters to you
2. EVEN IF you tell them you don't watch broadcast TV, they still want to visit you (although there is no legal requirement).
3. IF you let TVL into your house (which there is no legal obligation to do so), you are at the mercy of TVL as they can write what they want (i.e. they can say you are watching broadcast TV EVEN if you aren't - I have first hand experience of this.)
4. EVEN IF they think you are not watching now, they CONTINUE to send threathening letters to you (I assume just in case you change your mind the next day).

There are well documented cases of this on the internet as well. Just do a search. In summary, TVL cannot comprehend that people who has a TV don't need to watch broadcast TV. They assume you are guilty.

magyar

Schwade, I don't disbelieve what you're saying - I haven't had first hand experience of that, but I have had first hand experience of similar bodies.

However, to say that the Licence Fee is a bad way of us paying for TV because the body that collects the fee behaves badly is a little like saying that car parking is a bad thing because there are some unscrupulous traffic wardens.

Schwade

magyar wrote: »

Schwade, I don't disbelieve what you're saying - I haven't had first hand experience of that, but I have had first hand experience of similar bodies.

However, to say that the Licence Fee is a bad way of us paying for TV because the body that collects the fee behaves badly is a little like saying that car parking is a bad thing because there are some unscrupulous traffic wardens.

Of course, but I never associated the merits of Licence Fee and the collection of the Licence Fee in my post.

I just read a earlier post that you can just not pay if you don't like watch - just responding to this aspect.

As for merits of the licence fee, you know where I stand - i.e. as I don't think TV entertainment needs to be a government service, let people have the choice (just like print media).

mymatebob

Schwade wrote: »

To anyone who thinks TVL will leave them alone if you don't watch broadcast TV (since you don't have to pay for a licence), you have NEVER experienced a life without a licence before.

From my past experience and first experience of various people who decided that they would rather spend £134 on a holiday and DVDs, this is what TVL does:

1. continue to send threathening letters to you
2. EVEN IF you tell them you don't watch broadcast TV, they still want to visit you (although there is no legal requirement).
3. IF you let TVL into your house (which there is no legal obligation to do so), you are at the mercy of TVL as they can write what they want (i.e. they can say you are watching broadcast TV EVEN if you aren't - I have first hand experience of this.)
4. EVEN IF they think you are not watching now, they CONTINUE to send threathening letters to you (I assume just in case you change your mind the next day).

There are well documented cases of this on the internet as well. Just do a search. In summary, TVL cannot comprehend that people who has a TV don't need to watch broadcast TV. They assume you are guilty.

You are correct about the way these people work and I also think that magyar is correct in his argument pointing up the difference in the value (or otherwise) of the licence and the means of collection/enforcement

I got many letters from them over the years as the licence was not in my name (was in OHs)

I phoned and assured me there was no problem, but still the letters came.
And so did a visit.

They asked to see my licence and they were visibly disappointed when I was able to show them one.
They did not enter my house I left them on the doorstep when they asked to come in I said no.

So away they went - satisfied but not happy.

And still the letters came.

So I phoned and threatened them with legal action if they continued to harass me.

Letters stopped.

I think the licence is good value but the way that TVL do their business is very poor, in my experience

Schwade

mymatebob wrote: »

You are correct about the way these people work and I also think that magyar is correct in his argument pointing up the difference in the value (or otherwise) of the licence and the means of collection/enforcement

I got many letters from them over the years as the licence was not in my name (was in OHs)

I phoned and assured me there was no problem, but still the letters came.
And so did a visit.

They asked to see my licence and they were visibly disappointed when I was able to show them one.
They did not enter my house I left them on the doorstep when they asked to come in I said no.

So away they went - satisfied but not happy.

And still the letters came.

So I phoned and threatened them with legal action if they continued to harass me.

Letters stopped.

I think the licence is good value but the way that TVL do their business is very poor, in my experience

Just want to clarify that I wasn't associating merits of licence with licence enforcement. I just want to highlight this aspect because of an earlier post.

As you know, I don't like the tv licence because to me it is not worth it (note - my opinion).

So I play by their rules - i.e. I don't watch broadcast tv at all so I don't have to pay. Even when I play by their rules and perfectly correct under the law, they twist the law to suit their own purposes. That is why, I am very wary of TVL.

exprog

ShelfStacker wrote: »

*sigh* For the last time this language makes you look stupider and more reactionary than you actually are. It convinces no-one if you make pointless, inaccurate insults all the time.

*sigh* Again with the insults. For the last time stop trying to change the subject by insulting everyone who disagrees with you, it makes you look stupider and more dictatorial than you really are. It convinces no-one if you make, pointless, inaccurate insults all the time. Face the fact that most people do not want to pay for your bbc.

ShelfStacker wrote: »

Still no evidence. Still more dodged questions. Come on, I enjoy a good debate.

*sigh* Still avoiding the answer given to Martin’s question. Most people do not want to pay for your bbc. You seem to enjoy people’s right to agree with you and insult anyone who doesn’t. *sigh*

ShelfStacker wrote: »

I know you've certainly dodged the one about whether you have any evidence for your assertion that the BBC is biased (which you're still ignoring, by the way)

*sigh* For the last time nothing has been dodged. You have ignored things you don’t like. This thread is about paying for the bbc, not paying for whatever you think other people should provide for you. Anyone can easily find examples of the systematic bias for which the bbc is famed if they could be bothered to look. The bbc has even had to send it’s workforce on courses to try to teach them how not to be biased, all at taxpayer’s expense natch. *sigh*

Pay for your own pleasures and propaganda. In the meantime take advantage of the freebies people are forced to supply you but stop pretending it’s anything other than an abuse. *sigh*