I'd like to discuss something very near and dear to my heart, the
notion of 'withdrawing challenges'.
this is something that challengers and panelists often wish to do, but
Nicholas more often than not will say 'you can't do that in this game'
and then goes on about that if you interrupt someone, you stop their
flow, blah blah blah.
Now, I think that you should be allowed to withdraw your challenge in
the game, and the result being that NO POINTS are awarded or charged
or whatever in any context and the person that was interrupted keeps
going.
After all, in the early days of the programme Nicholas often would
charge no points for certain interruptions that nowadays earn people
bonus points left, right and center.
I mean if a person wishes to withdraw a challenge, they should be
allowed to do so.
>but
> I'd like to discuss something very near and dear to my heart, the
> notion of 'withdrawing challenges'.
>
> this is something that challengers and panelists often wish to do,
> Nicholas more often than not will say 'you can't do that in thisgame'
> and then goes on about that if you interrupt someone, you stoptheir
> flow, blah blah blah.in
>
> Now, I think that you should be allowed to withdraw your challenge
> the game, and the result being that NO POINTS are awarded orcharged
> or whatever in any context and the person that was interruptedkeeps
> going.people
>
> After all, in the early days of the programme Nicholas often would
> charge no points for certain interruptions that nowadays earn
> bonus points left, right and center.We couldn't disagree more with this suggestion...
>
> I mean if a person wishes to withdraw a challenge, they should be
> allowed to do so.
>
--- In just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com, "Robert L. Torres"
<bobbyshaddoe3004@ ...> wrote:
>
> I'd like to discuss something very near and dear to my heart, the
> notion of 'withdrawing challenges'.
>
> this is something that challengers and panelists often wish to do,
but
> Nicholas more often than not will say 'you can't do that in this
game'
> and then goes on about that if you interrupt someone, you stop
their
> flow, blah blah blah.
>
> Now, I think that you should be allowed to withdraw your challenge
in
> the game, and the result being that NO POINTS are awarded or
charged
> or whatever in any context and the person that was interrupted
keeps
> going.
>
> After all, in the early days of the programme Nicholas often would
> charge no points for certain interruptions that nowadays earn
people
> bonus points left, right and center.
>
> I mean if a person wishes to withdraw a challenge, they should be
> allowed to do so.
>
We couldn't disagree more with this suggestion.. .
David and Ubownan
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
>either ...
> No, I don't think so. So talking on "Radio Stations"
>
> A: A Radio Station is a place where radio programmes are ...
>
> B: BEEP. Um, I withdraw my challenge,
>
> A: As I was saying radio stations broadcast material made by
>the
> B: BEEP. Um, I withdraw my challenge,
>
> etc etc ! This is so off putting.
>
> On 14/08/07, Robert L. Torres <bobbyshaddoe3004@...> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to discuss something very near and dear to my heart,
> > notion of 'withdrawing challenges'.do, but
> >
> > this is something that challengers and panelists often wish to
> > Nicholas more often than not will say 'you can't do that in thisgame'
> > and then goes on about that if you interrupt someone, you stoptheir
> > flow, blah blah blah.challenge in
> >
> > Now, I think that you should be allowed to withdraw your
> > the game, and the result being that NO POINTS are awarded orcharged
> > or whatever in any context and the person that was interruptedkeeps
> > going.would
> >
> > After all, in the early days of the programme Nicholas often
> > charge no points for certain interruptions that nowadays earnpeople
> > bonus points left, right and center.
> >
> > I mean if a person wishes to withdraw a challenge, they should be
> > allowed to do so.
> >
> >
> >
>
On 29/08/2007, Robert L. Torres <bobbyshaddoe3004@...> wrote:I mean if people are allowed to challenge themselves, they should be
allowed to withdraw challenges. I mean, how is that any more
offputting than allowing someone to challenge themselves? or any
other blasted decision that Nicholas makes even in the face of
actual correct challenges.
--- In just-a-minute@..., "Gregory Auger"
<gregory.auger@...> wrote:
>
> No, I don't think so. So talking on "Radio Stations"
>
> A: A Radio Station is a place where radio programmes are ...
>
> B: BEEP. Um, I withdraw my challenge,
>
> A: As I was saying radio stations broadcast material made by
either ...
>
> B: BEEP. Um, I withdraw my challenge,
>
> etc etc ! This is so off putting.
>> On 14/08/07, Robert L. Torres <bobbyshaddoe3004@...> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to discuss something very near and dear to my heart,
the
> > notion of 'withdrawing challenges'.
> >
> > this is something that challengers and panelists often wish to
do, but
> > Nicholas more often than not will say 'you can't do that in this
game'
> > and then goes on about that if you interrupt someone, you stop
their
> > flow, blah blah blah.
> >
> > Now, I think that you should be allowed to withdraw your
challenge in
> > the game, and the result being that NO POINTS are awarded or
charged
> > or whatever in any context and the person that was interrupted
keeps
> > going.
> >
> > After all, in the early days of the programme Nicholas often
would
> > charge no points for certain interruptions that nowadays earn
people
> > bonus points left, right and center.
> >
> > I mean if a person wishes to withdraw a challenge, they should be
> > allowed to do so.
> >
> >
> >
>
> I mean if people are allowed to challenge themselves, they should beI'm not sure what you think would be the advantage of this, and you
> allowed to withdraw challenges. I mean, how is that any more
> offputting than allowing someone to challenge themselves? or any
> other blasted decision that Nicholas makes even in the face of
> actual correct challenges.
On Thursday, August 30, 2007, at 04:42 AM, Robert L. Torres wrote:
> I mean if people are allowed to challenge themselves, they should be
> allowed to withdraw challenges. I mean, how is that any more
> offputting than allowing someone to challenge themselves? or any
> other blasted decision that Nicholas makes even in the face of
> actual correct challenges.
I'm not sure what you think would be the advantage of this, and you
haven't cited an advantage.
If someone could withdraw a challenge after Nicholas ruled, there would
be no penalty for a wrong challenge. Therefore if you have the subject,
the only way you are going to get a point is by speaking at the whistle.
Unless you think you can go the whole 60 seconds, there's no point then
to trying to get a "flow" going - you might as well stop, let someone
else take over and hope to get back in.
It also means someone can interrupt someone else without any penalty.
You might as well hit the buzzer every two seconds - there's no
disincentive as you can just withdraw your challenge.
With no incentive to keep going and no penalty for challenging as much
as you like, it would be a choppy game, full of challenges, no long
surreal Paul Merton stories. I can't see how this would be good. It
would ruin one of the main avenues of comedy in the game and just
present a string of arguments over challenges.
I know you don't agree with much of what Nicholas says. But here's
something he sometimes says that we can both agree with - the game's
been going now for 40 years and has had some success with these rules.
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
> well, you may be right, but at the same time, it would also avoidIf you haven't challenged, you can't withdraw your challenge.
> instances of Nicholas saying that someone has challenged when they
> clearly haven't
On Friday, August 31, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Robert Torres wrote:
> well, you may be right, but at the same time, it would also avoid
> instances of Nicholas saying that someone has challenged when they
> clearly haven't
If you haven't challenged, you can't withdraw your challenge.
the rest of your email seems to be about the problem where a light goes
and someone says they haven't challenged. Two possibilities there - a
technical problem with the buzzers or the panellist isn't telling the
truth. If it's a technical problem, it's a technical problem. If they
deny pressing the buzzer, they're saying they haven't challenged, so
they can't have the option of withdrawing it. Either way it isn't
resolved by a rule change.
Anyway there are plenty of occasions when Nicholas does say something
like "we'll charge no points there" after a challenge. Which seems to be
what you want... I think...
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
> Yeah, Nicholas used to do that a lot in the past, usually in regards tohe did it a couple of weeks ago
> those comedic joke challenges that nowadays would garner bonus points,
> but there hasn't been a single occasion recently where Nicholas has
> charged 'no points'.
On Saturday, September 1, 2007, at 06:41 AM, Robert Torres wrote:
> Yeah, Nicholas used to do that a lot in the past, usually in regards to
> those comedic joke challenges that nowadays would garner bonus points,
> but there hasn't been a single occasion recently where Nicholas has
> charged 'no points'.
he did it a couple of weeks ago
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
> miracle of miracles. but bear in mind I haven't heard the latestMight have been better then not to say "there hasn't been a single
> season of episodes yet, because my computer is still on the blink.
> charged 'no points'."Other recent occasions (within past three years) - 20 February 2006, 30
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 10 | 23 | 12 | 1 | 13 | 5 | 1 | 19 | 12 | 31 | 4 | 14 |
| 2018 | 4 | 7 | 21 | 8 | 9 | 37 | 9 | 5 | 19 | 25 | 5 | 14 |
| 2017 | 4 | 34 | 22 | 12 | 17 | 20 | 4 | 19 | 23 | 44 | 23 | 16 |
| 2016 | 13 | 49 | 39 | 57 | 60 | 87 | 10 | 32 | 24 | 12 | 9 | 23 |
| 2015 | 51 | 97 | 32 | 49 | 41 | 54 | 20 | 28 | 0 | 14 | 31 | 16 |
| 2014 | 9 | 75 | 68 | 33 | 28 | 33 | 52 | 82 | 51 | 32 | 38 | 79 |
| 2013 | 463 | 251 | 98 | 87 | 81 | 192 | 88 | 98 | 86 | 38 | 54 | 27 |
| 2012 | 92 | 121 | 180 | 199 | 125 | 88 | 71 | 155 | 118 | 166 | 125 | 144 |
| 2011 | 112 | 78 | 71 | 73 | 134 | 225 | 252 | 152 | 62 | 183 | 165 | 63 |
| 2010 | 142 | 117 | 153 | 94 | 69 | 49 | 69 | 183 | 82 | 71 | 68 | 75 |
| 2009 | 67 | 45 | 42 | 97 | 90 | 149 | 110 | 70 | 63 | 42 | 35 | 39 |
| 2008 | 200 | 120 | 175 | 120 | 70 | 109 | 87 | 115 | 71 | 45 | 58 | 38 |
| 2007 | 165 | 447 | 132 | 99 | 95 | 57 | 140 | 118 | 74 | 88 | 125 | 99 |
| FAQ | Contact | Services | Terms | Privacy | Credits |
[Page generated in 0.075 seconds under 1.19% server load]
© 2012-2025 TVRDb.com. All rights reserved.