Things that annoy you beyond reason...(Vol. 7)
Discussion
119 said:
paulguitar said:
GasEngineer said:
While we're on Pointless: when AA says "tell us about yourself". No we're not interested. I couldn't give a shiny s
te about you or your life. Just get on with the questions FFS.
It would actually be much better if it were boringly transactional IMO!
The ultimate in tediousness has to be on the radio where some random member of the public participating in something like 'pop master' asks and then gets to randomly say 'hello' to various irrelevant people. What the hell is the point of this?te about you or your life. Just get on with the questions FFS. It would actually be much better if it were boringly transactional IMO!
paulguitar said:
The ultimate in tediousness has to be on the radio where some random member of the public participating in something like 'pop master' asks and then gets to randomly say 'hello' to various irrelevant people. What the hell is the point of this?
"Oh, and anyone else that knows me"Rich Boy Spanner said:
'Army training' Walts. Go to your local beauty spot with your kids and listen to some loud mouth 18 year old effing and jeffing at the top of his voice at some people running about. Just go away. You've never been in the army, your cute little khaki pretend army rucksack is the same size as barbie's. Go away.
Occassionally see them on the beach. It's usually cold and windy and damp and their clients look like they'd rather be on basic training for the SAS than do push ups on wet sand, with said tt. The 'modern method of selling houses".
I want to buy a house, and the amount that are now an auctions seems to be increasing.
All of them have a buyers' pack (£500) that you have to buy and before bidding, then a non-refundable reservation fee (around 5%) if you manage to secure it. If you don't win it then you're £500 down (plus all the other costs involved when looking to buy something)
And relax and keep looking...
I want to buy a house, and the amount that are now an auctions seems to be increasing.
All of them have a buyers' pack (£500) that you have to buy and before bidding, then a non-refundable reservation fee (around 5%) if you manage to secure it. If you don't win it then you're £500 down (plus all the other costs involved when looking to buy something)
And relax and keep looking...
S2r said:
The 'modern method of selling houses".
I want to buy a house, and the amount that are now an auctions seems to be increasing.
All of them have a buyers' pack (£500) that you have to buy and before bidding, then a non-refundable reservation fee (around 5%) if you manage to secure it. If you don't win it then you're £500 down (plus all the other costs involved when looking to buy something)
And relax and keep looking...
Yes, I was faced with this very thing about a year ago when I saw something I fancied. Already rather annoyed at the "buyer's pack" requirement, I had (wrongly) assumed that in the event I didn't win, it would be refunded. Oh no. That was my first and last foray into buying houses using the "modern method". I was surprised that I was seemiingly the only person who saw any problem with this, as other bidders seemed quite happy to throw their £500 away - and often numerous times. People are really dumb.I want to buy a house, and the amount that are now an auctions seems to be increasing.
All of them have a buyers' pack (£500) that you have to buy and before bidding, then a non-refundable reservation fee (around 5%) if you manage to secure it. If you don't win it then you're £500 down (plus all the other costs involved when looking to buy something)
And relax and keep looking...
Edited by r3g on Wednesday 20th March 18:16
RizzoTheRat said:
Rusty Old-Banger said:
I can't believe people watch Pointless for long enough to get wound up by it 
I watch enough of it to be wound up by some of the morons they initially asked the questions to.e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G
Scores 94
Who the f
k were the other 6 people?You have utterly misunderstood the nature of the questions asked of the 100 members of the public, the *answers* of which are used to generate these missing letter questions!
PF62 said:
RizzoTheRat said:
Rusty Old-Banger said:
I can't believe people watch Pointless for long enough to get wound up by it
I watch enough of it to be wound up by some of the morons they initially asked the questions to.e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G
Scores 94
Who the f
k were the other 6 people?You have utterly misunderstood the nature of the questions asked of the 100 members of the public, the *answers* of which are used to generate these missing letter questions!
I don’t believe any of it with regard to Pointless scores. Who but the producers of the program know how many people in their poll knew this that or the other in order to score the answers? It is transparently obvious that they can fix the scores on each round to make the programme flow the way they want it to and have the ‘right’ pair get to the final, and win or not win the jackpot as desired. I can’t believe they don’t do it this way.
RizzoTheRat said:
I watch enough of it to be wound up by some of the morons they initially asked the questions to.
e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G
Scores 94
Who the fk were the other 6 people?
Can I have the answer to this question, it's been bugging me.e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G
Scores 94
Who the f
k were the other 6 people?Dan Singh said:
PF62 said:
RizzoTheRat said:
Rusty Old-Banger said:
I can't believe people watch Pointless for long enough to get wound up by it
I watch enough of it to be wound up by some of the morons they initially asked the questions to.e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G
Scores 94
Who the f
k were the other 6 people?You have utterly misunderstood the nature of the questions asked of the 100 members of the public, the *answers* of which are used to generate these missing letter questions!
Rusty Old-Banger said:
Dan Singh said:
PF62 said:
RizzoTheRat said:
Rusty Old-Banger said:
I can't believe people watch Pointless for long enough to get wound up by it
I watch enough of it to be wound up by some of the morons they initially asked the questions to.e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G
Scores 94
Who the f
k were the other 6 people?You have utterly misunderstood the nature of the questions asked of the 100 members of the public, the *answers* of which are used to generate these missing letter questions!
Your complete and utter misunderstanding is that the 100 were never asked *that* question, and they were asked a completely different question with those answers being used to generate the question the contestants were asked.
Thus for the question you quote where you think there are six people who can't answer the P_G question, the question to the 100 would have been something like - 'in the next 100 seconds name as many farm animals as you can', and then from that list of farm animals the questions to the contestants are generated.
Are the six people "morons" for not thinking of naming a pig amongst all the other farm animals they are writing down in that 100 seconds?
PF62 said:
You said you were wound up by "some of the morons they initially asked the questions to" and gave an example of "e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G" and that it only achieved 94 and questioned who the 6 were that hadn't answered *that* question correctly.
Your complete and utter misunderstanding is that the 100 were never asked *that* question, and they were asked a completely different question with those answers being used to generate the question the contestants were asked.
Thus for the question you quote where you think there are six people who can't answer the P_G question, the question to the 100 would have been something like - 'in the next 100 seconds name as many farm animals as you can', and then from that list of farm animals the questions to the contestants are generated.
Are the six people "morons" for not thinking of naming a pig amongst all the other farm animals they are writing down in that 100 seconds?
What makes you think that is the way it is done?Your complete and utter misunderstanding is that the 100 were never asked *that* question, and they were asked a completely different question with those answers being used to generate the question the contestants were asked.
Thus for the question you quote where you think there are six people who can't answer the P_G question, the question to the 100 would have been something like - 'in the next 100 seconds name as many farm animals as you can', and then from that list of farm animals the questions to the contestants are generated.
Are the six people "morons" for not thinking of naming a pig amongst all the other farm animals they are writing down in that 100 seconds?
Roofless Toothless said:
PF62 said:
You said you were wound up by "some of the morons they initially asked the questions to" and gave an example of "e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G" and that it only achieved 94 and questioned who the 6 were that hadn't answered *that* question correctly.
Your complete and utter misunderstanding is that the 100 were never asked *that* question, and they were asked a completely different question with those answers being used to generate the question the contestants were asked.
Thus for the question you quote where you think there are six people who can't answer the P_G question, the question to the 100 would have been something like - 'in the next 100 seconds name as many farm animals as you can', and then from that list of farm animals the questions to the contestants are generated.
Are the six people "morons" for not thinking of naming a pig amongst all the other farm animals they are writing down in that 100 seconds?
What makes you think that is the way it is done?Your complete and utter misunderstanding is that the 100 were never asked *that* question, and they were asked a completely different question with those answers being used to generate the question the contestants were asked.
Thus for the question you quote where you think there are six people who can't answer the P_G question, the question to the 100 would have been something like - 'in the next 100 seconds name as many farm animals as you can', and then from that list of farm animals the questions to the contestants are generated.
Are the six people "morons" for not thinking of naming a pig amongst all the other farm animals they are writing down in that 100 seconds?
Rusty Old-Banger said:
Roofless Toothless said:
PF62 said:
You said you were wound up by "some of the morons they initially asked the questions to" and gave an example of "e.g. name the animal with vowels missing, and there's a picture of a pig and the clue P _ G" and that it only achieved 94 and questioned who the 6 were that hadn't answered *that* question correctly.
Your complete and utter misunderstanding is that the 100 were never asked *that* question, and they were asked a completely different question with those answers being used to generate the question the contestants were asked.
Thus for the question you quote where you think there are six people who can't answer the P_G question, the question to the 100 would have been something like - 'in the next 100 seconds name as many farm animals as you can', and then from that list of farm animals the questions to the contestants are generated.
Are the six people "morons" for not thinking of naming a pig amongst all the other farm animals they are writing down in that 100 seconds?
What makes you think that is the way it is done?Your complete and utter misunderstanding is that the 100 were never asked *that* question, and they were asked a completely different question with those answers being used to generate the question the contestants were asked.
Thus for the question you quote where you think there are six people who can't answer the P_G question, the question to the 100 would have been something like - 'in the next 100 seconds name as many farm animals as you can', and then from that list of farm animals the questions to the contestants are generated.
Are the six people "morons" for not thinking of naming a pig amongst all the other farm animals they are writing down in that 100 seconds?
Plus, if you have to deal with the general public you'd be surprised that just 6 out of 100 people are too thick to recognise a pig.
Hackney said:
The sheer number of drivers who cut the corner at this junction.
I get to the giveaway and turn right, and have to be so vigilant for idiots like this van driver.
Not helped by cars parking right up to the junction, like the Smart.
Similar near me. They all seem to do it. Sheer laziness/lack of attention to safety and if you beep when they narrowly avoid taking the front of your car off you get the mouthed FO.I get to the giveaway and turn right, and have to be so vigilant for idiots like this van driver.
Not helped by cars parking right up to the junction, like the Smart.
[quote=captain_cynic]
I'm inclined to believe they're genuine. There isn't really any advantage to rigging it. There would be too many people that would know, back when we had the likes of John Edwards (crossing over) everyone knew how they were doing it (mic and cameras in the foyer, et al.) because the production crew couldn't keep secrets.
Me too, prizes are small if they win, cheap show to make why fiddle the results?
Just too boring for me I am afraid and am strong trying to generate excitement when the column drops just winds me up, as he does. Long explanations of the pointless answers tedious
I'm inclined to believe they're genuine. There isn't really any advantage to rigging it. There would be too many people that would know, back when we had the likes of John Edwards (crossing over) everyone knew how they were doing it (mic and cameras in the foyer, et al.) because the production crew couldn't keep secrets.
Me too, prizes are small if they win, cheap show to make why fiddle the results?
Just too boring for me I am afraid and am strong trying to generate excitement when the column drops just winds me up, as he does. Long explanations of the pointless answers tedious
Mercdriver said:
captain_cynic said:
I'm inclined to believe they're genuine. There isn't really any advantage to rigging it. There would be too many people that would know, back when we had the likes of John Edwards (crossing over) everyone knew how they were doing it (mic and cameras in the foyer, et al.) because the production crew couldn't keep secrets.
Me too, prizes are small if they win, cheap show to make why fiddle the results?Just too boring for me I am afraid and am strong trying to generate excitement when the column drops just winds me up, as he does. Long explanations of the pointless answers tedious
I wonder why shows like Pointless still exist, they're the kind of thing you only watch when there is nothing else to do or as background noise whilst you're doing something else.
Shows like Pointless made sense in the olden days of broadcast TV when they occupied the "cooking/eating" time slots (sandwiched around the 6 o'clock news) but in the world of streaming they don't really have a place.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff