(05-07-2013 21:47 )mr mystery Wrote: [ -> ] (05-07-2013 20:35 )Grawth Wrote: [ -> ]Although if it turns out that I'm wrong and there has been NO regulator involvement in what happened recently then I will happily join you in complaining very loudly - as I have done before.
Grawth, you've not been complaining to NICAM about BSX like you did to Ofcom about a channel in the past have you ? .
(11-10-2009 23:10 )Grawth Wrote: [ -> ]when I later complained that a channel was breaching the code by showing R18 material (and in one case material BEYOND R18) in the hope that forcing ofcom to fine a channel might force the channel to fight back and win, Ofcom refused to investigate my complaint on the grounds that, as I was an acknowledged supporter of R18 on the telly, my complaint was clearly vexatious and if I complained again they would consider that I was deliberately wasting their time and further steps would be taken.
What channel was it by the way that you complained about that was showing material BEYOND R18 ?
No I haven't. The channel at the time was Sport XXX and they showed fisting in one of their encrypted shows. I was happy to see it, but at the time a number of people (myself included, obviously) thought that seeing as the channels were not standing up to Ofcom, maybe the prospect of being fined might stiffen their backbone.
However, as is made clear above, Ofcom refused to accept my complaint because I was a known supporter of R18 being allowed on TV. They threatened "further action" if I continued to waste their time, and labelled me a "vexatious complainer". They never investigated and nothing was done to SportXXX.
I have to say, rival channels complaining against each other just to get channels in trouble seem to be the perfect example of vexatious complaining, but Ofcom seem happy enough to accept those!!
Besides, I thought you were firmly of the opinion that there was no regulator involvement? Changed your mind??
(05-07-2013 21:19 )sierraman Wrote: [ -> ]I personally think that this is a well run and well managed forum.you said this forum is NOT representative of the viewers of bsx in general.again we differ wildly.i DO THINK that this forum IS REPRESENTATIVE of the viewers that buy bsx.i wouldn't have spent many hours posting if I had thought that it was a waste of time and wasn't worthwhile.you don't have any regard for my views,and I definitely don't have any regard for yours,so for the sake of everyone else lets just agree to differ and post our separate ways.i will keep tuning in to look at the posts of the many people on here who give thoughtful and genuine response to stuff they have bought and seen.as I said,in fairness to others this is my FINAL PERSONAL response to you.
Would you PLEASE stop putting words into my mouth. Who said the forum is not well run or managed? Certainly wasn't me, despite what you say.
And yet again you imply that MY views are somehow NOT "thoughtful and genuine responses to what I have seen". By all means agree to disagree, but stop suggesting I'm somehow not telling the truth about what I have seen.
As for the posts here being representative or not of the general viewers of BSX - I studied (to degree) and taught (to A-level) statistics and I can tell you that there is no way of actually telling how representative this forum is of the general viewers without knowing a lot more about numbers and demographics, but the chances of the posters of this forum actually being properly representative of the wider views are pretty slim indeed.
That's not my opinion - that's just statistics at work.
Anyway, feel free to ignore this as you say you will. However, I'm quite happy to keep replying to your posts - sometimes to agree, sometimes to disagree - but if I see something worth commenting on I will :-)
(05-07-2013 22:23 )D T Wrote: [ -> ] (05-07-2013 20:35 )Grawth Wrote: [ -> ]Although if it turns out that I'm wrong and there has been NO regulator involvement in what happened recently then I will happily join you in complaining very loudly - as I have done before.
(11-10-2009 23:10 )Grawth Wrote: [ -> ]when I later complained that a channel was breaching the code by showing R18 material (and in one case material BEYOND R18) in the hope that forcing ofcom to fine a channel might force the channel to fight back and win, Ofcom refused to investigate my complaint on the grounds that, as I was an acknowledged supporter of R18 on the telly, my complaint was clearly vexatious and if I complained again they would consider that I was deliberately wasting their time and further steps would be taken.
And you once had the nerve to have a go at me about a screenshot I posted in case a grass saw it and used it to complain about this channel. Always knew you were a total bellend.
And if it turns out that the screenshots YOU posted were used as a basis for a complaint that has now forced BSX to give us tamer shows, how stupid will you feel?
Thanks for the personal insult by the way. I thought we were here to discuss the goings on at BSX, not just fling insults around. Or is this how you deal with people who sometimes disagree with you?
(11-10-2009 23:10 )Grawth Wrote: [ -> ]Besides, I thought you were firmly of the opinion that there was no regulator involvement? Changed your mind??
My mind is open to any suggestions concerning reasons for tamer output, BSX/Xtreme has been up and down in harder or softer content since it first started broadcasting, no one has ever found out why . I don't think i have posted that there was defiantly no regulator involvement (i haven't yet checked), i don't know if there is or isn't, i mentioned that the camera operators and producers were bad and they had spoiled the shows . I said that Ofcom do not regulate BSX or deal with complaints, they cannot request recordings dish out fines or revoke the licence of BSX, as stated by Ofcom it's out of their jurisdiction and is regulated and licensed by the Dutch, Nicam the Dutch regulator deals with any complaints about BSX
If BSX has fallen fowl to the regulator then it will be mentioned by the relevant regulator in their bulletins .
A solid performance tonight from Lacey. She's clearly been told to watch her step so she wasn't at the top of her game, but a good night from her nonetheless. Plus the camerawork was better than on her last outing.
So no masturbation or penetration? If so no point in watching any more live shows if they are only going to show nudity and no sexual action.
(06-07-2013 11:10 )SCIROCCO Wrote: [ -> ]So no masturbation or penetration? If so no point in watching any more live shows if they are only going to show nudity and no sexual action.
I did not view last nights show but if that was the case i think we may be witnessing this channels slow death as i cant believe there are enough people out there that will want to purchase a liveshow with no sex just nudity as its already available fta.
(06-07-2013 11:10 )SCIROCCO Wrote: [ -> ]So no masturbation or penetration? If so no point in watching any more live shows if they are only going to show nudity and no sexual action.
They're not allowed to show penetration. The disappointing thing for me is that lacey had clearly been told not to touch her pussy, and the camera person had clearly been told to move away if it looked like sure might. Given you can see pussy rubbing on other encrypted channels I'm not sure why bsx chose not to show it.
(06-07-2013 15:50 )Grawth Wrote: [ -> ] (06-07-2013 11:10 )SCIROCCO Wrote: [ -> ]So no masturbation or penetration? If so no point in watching any more live shows if they are only going to show nudity and no sexual action.
They're not allowed to show penetration. The disappointing thing for me is that lacey had clearly been told not to touch her pussy, and the camera person had clearly been told to move away if it looked like sure might. Given you can see pussy rubbing on other encrypted channels I'm not sure why bsx chose not to show it.
It would be great if someone from babestation could be bothered to state on the forum why the sudden change in what they are prepared to show
