disagree my opinions are less valid just because I mainly praise the babeshow babes. why does that make my opinions any less valid than yours, scottishbloke's or anyone else's opinions on the forum responsible adult. everyone's opinion on here has equal validity and should be treated as such
(05-10-2014 05:44 )Lotuseater Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2014 22:37 )Digital Dave Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2014 21:49 )Lotuseater Wrote: [ -> ]How come pre-10pm 903 Television X can broadcast their advertorial video montages girls with sucking each others' tits etc. but the live channels can't do anything remotely like that at 3 am even???
There is certainly a discrepancy in the rules that allows the TVX 10 minute free promos (free to air I assume) to be far more explicit than the fta babe channels ever can be, including allowing swearing. I can't remember what the utterly ludicrous reasoning was - perhaps eccles or mr mystery could comment?
Well that just highlights the sheer hypocrisy of the regulators - it is all about petty rules rather than protecting the children...
What is it we are protecting the children from? When I was a young lad I had all the usual kids pastimes. Riding my bike, playing football and other games. This time of year collecting wood for the bonfire. All the normal things young lads do. But one of my favourite pastimes was sticking the pages of girlie mags together. For me this is what the babechannel are, today's "girlie mags". Do kids really need protecting from them?
(05-10-2014 10:41 )RESPONSIBLE ADULT Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2014 05:44 )Lotuseater Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2014 22:37 )Digital Dave Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2014 21:49 )Lotuseater Wrote: [ -> ]How come pre-10pm 903 Television X can broadcast their advertorial video montages girls with sucking each others' tits etc. but the live channels can't do anything remotely like that at 3 am even???
There is certainly a discrepancy in the rules that allows the TVX 10 minute free promos (free to air I assume) to be far more explicit than the fta babe channels ever can be, including allowing swearing. I can't remember what the utterly ludicrous reasoning was - perhaps eccles or mr mystery could comment?
Well that just highlights the sheer hypocrisy of the regulators - it is all about petty rules rather than protecting the children...
What is it we are protecting the children from? When I was a young lad I had all the usual kids pastimes. Riding my bike, playing football and other games. This time of year collecting wood for the bonfire. All the normal things young lads do. But one of my favourite pastimes was sticking the pages of girlie mags together. For me this is what the babechannel are, today's "girlie mags". Do kids really need protecting from them?
Exactly. Kids don't need protecting from them. They are very tame these days. Even back in their heyday i wouldn't describe them as porn, more erotic entertainment.
I would much rather my kids catch a few minutes of a babeshow than stumble across some of the sites on the internet showing very extreme acts. Not just sexual sites but ones showing violence that shouldn't be witnessed by impressionable kids.
For a teenage boy wanting to see boobs is a 'normal' thing.
The babeshows provide a safe platform for this. They should be allowed to show what they could in their heyday.
What offcom don't realise is they are probably doing more harm than good. I say this because over regulation of the channels, (or if they had their way, banning of them all together) will drive people onto the internet.
Completely agree with Block and Resp Adult
(05-10-2014 01:02 )Scottishbloke Wrote: [ -> ]The ironic thing about it all is that when all of these shows took place the channels were at their peek with daily warning coming from Ofcom. Now the channels barely even get a mention now yet you get the impression as if the scrutiny was 10 times more 
i have had the feeling for a wile now that ofcom has started to move some of there attention away form the shows a bit as the content has reached a level they are happy with and they have got the channels into a culture of self policing which is far more rigorous they any thing they could enforce,
i get the feeling that ofcom has stopped allegedly making complaints to them self's about the channels,
i hope the channels also have the feeling that they are coming out the dark days and can start doing a bit more, when we have a weekend like this it gives me hope that it may be true
(05-10-2014 10:21 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ]disagree my opinions are less valid just because I mainly praise the babeshow babes. why does that make my opinions any less valid than yours, scottishbloke's or anyone else's opinions on the forum responsible adult. everyone's opinion on here has equal validity and should be treated as such
Don't want to fall out with you Rammy. But your opinions never really vary do they? You just use the same collection of words over and over and over again and again and again. About whoever girl it may be on a certain channel. And as I say Rammy, don't want to fall out with you. Oh did I just repeat myself, sorry.
Responsible Adult does have a point.
No offence Rammy but this is a perfect example of your repetitive reviews of the shows, this is your past 4 Cagney and Lacey reviews with regards to Mellies shows
Other than a few words switched around they are all near identical.
(24-09-2014 08:43 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ]brilliant nightshow last night from Mellie. she looked great in her sexy secretary outfit and was at her very best with lots of cagney and lacey bouncing around and some lovely bending over the office desk with her very nice arse at the camera
(26-09-2014 09:35 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ]good show from mellie last night. she looked very sexy in her outfit and was at her filthiest all night with lots of cagney and lacey bouncing around and mellie giving them a good fondle.
hope mellie is on again soon
(01-10-2014 08:53 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ]very good show again last night from mellie last night. she looked very hot in her black pvc outfit and was on her very best filthy form with lots of cagney and lacey bouncing around and some lovely bending over with her very nice arse at the camera
(04-10-2014 23:53 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ]hope you can as mellie did another good show last night. she looked fantastic in her sexy secretary/businesswoman outfit and used the office set very well with lots of cagney and lacey bouncing around and some nice bending over the desk with her very nice arse at the camera
If Repetitive reviews are being posted these are surely a fair and accurate reflection of 99.99% of the babeshows' output ?.....ie : Same Old Same Old
I approach this from a slightly different angle.
Even when certain babes do put on a really good show some of them get the credit they deserve more universally than others.
Admittedly some of this is down to the extent of personal favouritism but even so I still feel that SOME of the babes who are more willing to try different things and push a few boundaries don't get the credit they deserve.
It may well be that for whatever reason people only choose to watch a certain selection of babes.
I can only recommend opening eyes to all the possibilities and all babes across the channels where possible.
It never ceases to amaze me the number of quality stints I see from different babes. They are still too few and far between but they often come from what I might originally have imagined to be a surprising source.
Limited options create over familiarity and a narrow perspective in my eyes and as a consequence I keep a beady eye out for quality from all channels.
The more surprising the better imo.
The forum can often get bogged down as a result of narrow perspective and its inherent natural consequences.
I tend to think it best to give myself the most options to be captivated and if nothing captures my imagination then have a whinge. But hey thats just me. Each to their own.
(04-10-2014 22:37 )Digital Dave Wrote: [ -> ] (04-10-2014 21:49 )Lotuseater Wrote: [ -> ]How come pre-10pm 903 Television X can broadcast their advertorial video montages girls with sucking each others' tits etc. but the live channels can't do anything remotely like that at 3 am even???
There is certainly a discrepancy in the rules that allows the TVX 10 minute free promos (free to air I assume) to be far more explicit than the fta babe channels ever can be, including allowing swearing. I can't remember what the utterly ludicrous reasoning was - perhaps eccles or mr mystery could comment?
I don't actually know why TVX can show what they do in the free to view unencrypted promos, and the babe channels can't do the same, but i think it's something to do with the channels being licensed for adult chat and not just straight forward advertising ? .
The free to air phone chat babe channels are classed as "long form advertising" the licences Ofcom grant to the phone in babe channels have specific rules for adult chat and daytime chat services, these are different from regular tv day and night shows .So maybe because TVX isn't a adult phone in chat service then their free to view promo doesn't come under the same rules because it doesn't use a adult advertisement chat licence, even though the promo is a advert ?.
There is a few links in this in breach ruling Ofcom gave to Playboy TV chat, it describes how Ofcom view and regulate the babe channels, it's the one were Dannii Harwoods behind the door show was found in beach .
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binarie...obb238.pdf
Apparently broadcasting that sort of material did not comply with the adult chat guidance, and the positioning in a specialist adult section and the time it was broadcast (12am to 12.30am) was not sufficient has to ensure serious and wide spread offence against generally expected standards was not caused .
Stronger imagery is shown both by TVX and Playboy on their non encrypted parts of their encrypted shows during their free to view adverts/promos that broadcast throughout the night . Ofcom don't seem to think these stronger promos will cause widespread offence, but do think the Dannii Harwood broadcast is likely to cause widespread offence against generally expected standards .
Check out Ofcom's wording in link to the PB TV Chat in breach ruling i have given, to me it just proves how stupid the babe channel rules are .