|
|
Post by Simon Bolton on Mar 13, 2014 12:10:44 GMT
I note that on "What Culture" that there is a rumour that the complete "Smugglers" has been found...possibly. That one seems to have come out of the blue.
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Mar 13, 2014 12:17:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Mar 13, 2014 12:22:07 GMT
Same level of substantiation as any number of circulating rumours, though. My Secret Source Reckons...  Not a new thing, just a spin on the same old with another story title getting the focus. Lots of choices, reckon we'll see this until enough get bored with it.  Reminds me of this, to be honest: (Fizz, crackle.) ROMANA: Oh blast, here we go again. (The Doctor trips over his own feet. Romana giggles.) DOCTOR: What's the matter? ROMANA: Well, now his probe circuit's jammed. DOCTOR: Well, that's easy. Just waggle his tail. ROMANA: All right. We've tried everything else. (K9's ears burst into life.) K9: Thank you, mistress. Repairs complete. DOCTOR: That's the third time. What's happening? ROMANA: The Tardis appears to be functioning normally. DOCTOR: Yes. Then what? Repeated time cycles? Oh, no. It couldn't be a chronic hysteresis, could it? ROMANA: Chronic hysteresis! (gulp) I hope not. If it is, we'll be stuck here forever. DOCTOR: Yes. (Fizz, crackle.) ROMANA: Oh blast, here we go again. (The Doctor trips over his own feet. Romana giggles.)  |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Mar 13, 2014 12:39:42 GMT
Not a new thing, just a spin on the same old with another story title getting the focus. Lots of choices, reckon we'll see this until enough get bored with it. "Until enough get bored with it"..? Dear god, hasn't that happened yet..? |
|
|
|
Post by steveb on Mar 13, 2014 12:51:19 GMT
Not a new thing, just a spin on the same old with another story title getting the focus. Lots of choices, reckon we'll see this until enough get bored with it. "Until enough get bored with it"..? Dear god, hasn't that happened yet..? Rumours fascinate me I can sit and stare at them for hours. And the best thing is, every time one gets debunked, there'll be a new one along in a minute (or at least, the way things are at the moment, in the next few hours) On top of that, it's as near certain as possible that some, let's say 7, officially-undisclosed episodes have been recovered, so 100% disappointment isn't on the cards. 90% maybe but not 100%. |
|
|
|
Post by steven g on Mar 13, 2014 13:01:52 GMT
(The Doctor trips over his own feet. Romana giggles.) I thought - if I remember correctly - he trips over an apron that he threw on the floor of the TARDIS. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Mar 13, 2014 13:15:12 GMT
Not a new thing, just a spin on the same old with another story title getting the focus. Lots of choices, reckon we'll see this until enough get bored with it. "Until enough get bored with it"..? Dear god, hasn't that happened yet..? Maybe we'll never get out of it then, Rob?  Nah. Sooner or later, the page views for articles like this will start to dwindle, I reckon. Whether that's due to actual new finds on sale, or the complete lack of any newly recovered material for a depressingly convincing period, I'd say we'll reach Peak Rumours at some point.  To each their own, of course!  |
|
|
|
Post by Paul McDermott on Mar 13, 2014 13:17:25 GMT
(The Doctor trips over his own feet. Romana giggles.) I thought - if I remember correctly - he trips over an apron that he threw on the floor of the TARDIS. You may be right Steven, and if so, I shan't quibble. |
|
|
|
Post by scotttelfer on Mar 13, 2014 13:24:55 GMT
Not a new thing, just a spin on the same old with another story title getting the focus. Lots of choices, reckon we'll see this until enough get bored with it. "Until enough get bored with it"..? Dear god, hasn't that happened yet..? Sadly given the nature of the rumour if it was indeed true we would be waiting several years before they did anything anyway and to make matters worse it has now become feasible for a hypothetical recovery to have been restored. Of course no such recovery has happened, or if it has the BBC haven't had it returned yet (or have only received it in the couple of weeks). if something has been recovered we'll hear about it in due course, but it oculd be years away, and any article claiming to know certain stories or even worse an announcement date should be rubbished on the spot frankly unless there is some sort of obvious proof behind it (such as a press announcement being organized). |
|
Richard Develyn
Member
Living in hope that more missing episodes will come back to us.
Posts: 574
|
Post by Richard Develyn on Mar 13, 2014 13:26:16 GMT
I guess they all need to take their turn.
I *like* The Smugglers quite a lot, actually. I should have posted it up as an underrated story on the other thread.
Richard
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex Dering on Mar 13, 2014 13:39:56 GMT
My two complaints about the rumors, rumours and Omnirumour:
1. The "sources" are accorded faith healer status. By that, I mean that if the information is correct, the source is vindicated, but if the information isn't correct, the source isn't blamed. Thus, the sources are always right, never wrong, so how dare anyone criticize?
2. When the source turns out to be wrong (how much longer will the Omnirumour run before only the absolute looney-tune diehards still cling to it), the source is never then dragged out into the sunlight and exposed. Thus, John Smith reports in 1995 that a cache of videotapes have been found. They never materialize. John Smith is never publicly outed. In 1998, John Smith "reveals" that several films were purchased at a yard sale. Those never show up. In 2013, John Smith rolls out the Omnirumour.
It's one thing to protect a source who provides legit information. But a source who just makes crap up? I think that the sites that continue to breathlessly post every fragment of a hint of a whisper (yes DWW, I mean you) ought to take a couple courses in journalism and skepticism. They've repeatedly said their sources are "legit." Fine. How are they legit? When Easter rolls around and nothing new has emerged, will the legitimacy of the source(s) be re-evaluated? Will "evidence" provided by the source to demonstrate that he or she actually knows what he or she is talking about be reviewed publicly? Will the source be required to provide an explanation? Or will it simply be "our sources confirm" again followed with a lot of "Well, we can't name him, he'll lose his job." What job? If his job gave him access to this information, the information would have been validated. That it has not been validated leaves me thinking the source doesn't have any access at all, has taken the site in question for a ride, and is now going to sit back for a while and laugh at how many fans had their hopes dashed before cranking it all up again in a few months or years while a new batch of gullibles shout the same nonsense to the heavens. "108,335 missing episodes of Doctor Who found in disused boot cupboard in Surrey! Our source confirms it!"
|
|
|
|
Post by George D on Mar 13, 2014 13:54:00 GMT
One thing that I find complely wrong is when it says, "He (ian) come into this because he’s been saying, on his Twitter feed, that 96 out of 97 episodes were recovered and are being held back for reasons undetermined. "
This is completely false. While ian has posted that he believes more Are out there, his writings appear reluctant to believe anything of that magnitude.
If they can make this error, then the whole article is suspect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon Jailler on Mar 13, 2014 14:21:09 GMT
If these "sources" really were in the know, there would be no rumour involved because for the source to have any credibility they would have to be involved in the recovery and re-release of the episode and if they have first hand knowledge of that process then why blab about it to a third party and risk the facts being distorted?
I'd hate to be a killjoy though because all these lists appearing and most of the theories are great fun after long years of lean prospects for further finds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon Jailler on Mar 13, 2014 14:23:49 GMT
My two complaints about the rumors, rumours and Omnirumour: 1. The "sources" are accorded faith healer status. By that, I mean that if the information is correct, the source is vindicated, but if the information isn't correct, the source isn't blamed. Thus, the sources are always right, never wrong, so how dare anyone criticize? 2. When the source turns out to be wrong (how much longer will the Omnirumour run before only the absolute looney-tune diehards still cling to it), the source is never then dragged out into the sunlight and exposed. Thus, John Smith reports in 1995 that a cache of videotapes have been found. They never materialize. John Smith is never publicly outed. In 1998, John Smith "reveals" that several films were purchased at a yard sale. Those never show up. In 2013, John Smith rolls out the Omnirumour. It's one thing to protect a source who provides legit information. But a source who just makes crap up? I think that the sites that continue to breathlessly post every fragment of a hint of a whisper (yes DWW, I mean you) ought to take a couple courses in journalism and skepticism. They've repeatedly said their sources are "legit." Fine. How are they legit? When Easter rolls around and nothing new has emerged, will the legitimacy of the source(s) be re-evaluated? Will "evidence" provided by the source to demonstrate that he or she actually knows what he or she is talking about be reviewed publicly? Will the source be required to provide an explanation? Or will it simply be "our sources confirm" again followed with a lot of "Well, we can't name him, he'll lose his job." What job? If his job gave him access to this information, the information would have been validated. That it has not been validated leaves me thinking the source doesn't have any access at all, has taken the site in question for a ride, and is now going to sit back for a while and laugh at how many fans had their hopes dashed before cranking it all up again in a few months or years while a new batch of gullibles shout the same nonsense to the heavens. "108,335 missing episodes of Doctor Who found in disused boot cupboard in Surrey! Our source confirms it!" These announcement dates are amusing. One day someone will call it right. Dammit - just speculated on a date. |
|
|
|
Post by Simon Jailler on Mar 13, 2014 14:30:37 GMT
He has definitely overplayed IL's public views on the omnirumour - he has been teasing Phil Morris but he's not (to my knowledge) categorically stated 96 episodes are back. Some rumour mongers even claim the Feast of Steven is back just to thoroughly confuse anyone who feels the number of episodes concerned stack up. I'd love The Smugglers to be back and much more. |
|
