as I have said many times, THE NEW OSG HAS NOT LAUNCHED YET... it is coming in 2/3 weeks, I previously said 'a matter of weeks' which seems to have caused confusion among the chronic cynics among you
out of interest vila, have you anything positive to say about anything? looking through your post history, its very unlikely
(05-11-2011 02:15 )babestation Wrote: [ -> ]out of interest vila, have you anything positive to say about anything? looking through your post history, its very unlikely
Proving, yet again, that you never actually read my posts. If you did, you might stand a chance of making sensible replies which actually address the subject matter of my comments.
(05-11-2011 02:31 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]Proving, yet again, that you never actually read my posts. If you did, you might stand a chance of making sensible replies which actually address the subject matter of my comments.
I can read your latest posts fine at
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/search.php?ac...115a4aeed9
(05-11-2011 02:35 )babestation Wrote: [ -> ] (05-11-2011 02:31 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]Proving, yet again, that you never actually read my posts. If you did, you might stand a chance of making sensible replies which actually address the subject matter of my comments.
I can read your latest posts fine at http://www.babeshows.co.uk/search.php?ac...115a4aeed9
Good. Please do so and then apologise for your previous comment.
Edit: And to be faithful to your original comment, please actually look at my post HISTORY as you claim to have done. Not that you'll need to go back much more than 24 hours to have to eat your words.
(05-11-2011 02:52 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]Good. Please do so and then apologise for your previous comment.
Edit: And to be faithful to your original comment, please actually look at my post HISTORY as you claim to have done. Not that you'll need to go back much more than 24 hours to have to eat your words.
i don't need to apologise, people can browse your latest posts and make their own mind up.
(09-11-2011 01:27 )babestation Wrote: [ -> ] (05-11-2011 02:52 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]Good. Please do so and then apologise for your previous comment.
Edit: And to be faithful to your original comment, please actually look at my post HISTORY as you claim to have done. Not that you'll need to go back much more than 24 hours to have to eat your words.
i don't need to apologise, people can browse your latest posts and make their own mind up.
Still nothing more to say on the subject of my original post then? (You know - the one before you started trying to deflect everyone's attention with your 'straw man' arguments.)
Edit: The fact that you think only my latest posts are relevant shows how thoroughly you researched my post HISTORY. Besides, nobody need look any further than this to see how foolish your remarks are:
(07-11-2011 21:57 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]Sweet - more please. Not normally a daytime viewer, so I hadn't seen Sasha before and 18 minutes last night wasn't nearly enough. We need her on a full night show asap.
(09-11-2011 01:38 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]Still nothing more to say on the subject of my original post then? (You know - the one before you started trying to deflect everyone's attention with your 'straw man' arguments.)
What was your original post? more than likely we've already answered it
(09-11-2011 01:47 )babestation Wrote: [ -> ] (09-11-2011 01:38 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]Still nothing more to say on the subject of my original post then? (You know - the one before you started trying to deflect everyone's attention with your 'straw man' arguments.)
What was your original post? more than likely we've already answered it
What? You're so familiar with my post history that you can't remember what started your latest tantrum only a few days ago?
(09-11-2011 01:54 )babestation Wrote: [ -> ]oh aren't you clever 
Not at all. You dug your own trap - I just nudged you into it.
Since you're obviously having difficulty, this was my original post:
(02-11-2011 21:27 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]The giant 'CALL NOW! GIRL ON GIRL CALL!' message was bad enough in its original form with the text 'floating' in front of the screen image, but the new method of putting it onto an opaque charcoal grey banner stretching across the full width of the screen is yet another massive pain-in-the-arse backward step.
You then made what appeared to be a general response to all recent posts in this thread, to which I replied:
(03-11-2011 04:21 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]And this justifies changing an already highly annoying graphic into one which is even more intrusive . . . how, exactly?
The pertinent bits from subsequent posts went like this:
(03-11-2011 09:22 )babestation Wrote: [ -> ]who exactly said the new OSG is even more intrusive?
(03-11-2011 16:48 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]It's self-evident that a solid opaque banner right across the whole width of the screen has to be more intrusive than having only the text 'floating' in front of the screen image.
(04-11-2011 18:29 )skully Wrote: [ -> ]The girl caller banner needs killed imo, it's possibly the most pointless, annoying OSG of them all, the box gives you the girl caller info, as does the girl on screen, then this stupid stripe shows up
(04-11-2011 18:34 )vila Wrote: [ -> ] (04-11-2011 18:29 )skully Wrote: [ -> ]then this stupid stripe shows up
I don't think 'babestation' will understand that last bit - he seems to suffer from stripe-blindness. Leastways, that's all I can think of to explain why he doesn't see it as intrusive. 
(04-11-2011 18:56 )babestation Wrote: [ -> ]i didn't say the current OSGs aren't intrusive, far from it
(04-11-2011 20:52 )vila Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see what else can be inferred from this comment:
(03-11-2011 09:22 )babestation Wrote: [ -> ]who exactly said the new OSG is even more intrusive?
As I recently described the new 'GIRL CALLER' banner (or stripe) osg used for the past few nights as "even more intrusive", I assumed that was what you were referring to.
We're still waiting for you to explain why you think the new way of displaying the 'GIRL CALLER!' message, in a solid dark grey banner (or stripe), isn't more intrusive than the original floating text version and/or justify its introduction. (Without trying to pretend you thought we were talking about the new SYSTEM for OSGs, which clearly wasn't the case as we haven't seen it yet.)