|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 10, 2013 16:56:34 GMT
Actually, Rob, if you look at what I've written in the DWM Special, there is no 'spreading of nonsense'. All I have done is written an editorial about missing episodes, in a magazine ABOUT missing episodes, which addresses in general terms the idea that rumours will always circulate about missing episodes as long as there are episodes that are missing. I don't think that's a particularly unreasonable thing for a Missing Episodes magazine to do. I hope people enjoy the new Missing Episodes magazine – I think it's come out rather well. The official publication date is tomorrow (11 July). Tom Spilsbury Editor, Doctor Who Magazine I can't comment on the exact content of your editorial, Tom, as I haven't yet seen a copy of the magazine. My point was more in agreement with Jas above - surprise that you brought this particular rumour up, when other rumours down the years have been left unmentioned. If your editorial is, as you say, just in general terms, then fair enough, I retract what I said and I apologise for misrepresenting you. My point is that from the posts I've read by people who have seen your piece, I was under the impression that you specifically addressed the current rumour, which would have been a surprising development, and possibly unwise, given the undue credibility that the rumour would then be afforded. If the current rumor indeed deserves no credibility, I only wonder why those who know for a fact that there is nothing to this rumor don't just do fandom the small kindness of putting it all to rest. There is so much discussion on the topic across many forums and on many websites (to include even more general interest websites such as tvshowsondvd) that interested fans feel compelled to continue to look and look and look for clarity one way or another about this. Is it some kind of spectator sport to watch everyone talking in circles endlessly? Why would addressing the current rumor one way or another with clarity be unwise? It would seem to me to be a kindness to provide some clarity instead of taking the same amount of time and effort to speak of “nonsense” or “undue credibility.” There is a sort of scoffing, but no plain speaking. That in itself tends to give the rumor a certain degree of credibility.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 8, 2013 20:28:04 GMT
However, it is only because of slightly odd happenings such as this that people have been left wondering. It's the lack of clarity in the situation that causes a person to wonder if something might be happening on the missing episodes front. Of course, because no one is saying anything concrete, there is nothing concrete to pass along either. Ever thought of becoming a politician? I very much appreciate that you've asked me this question. However, at this time, I can neither confirm that I have thought of this nor confirm that I have not thought of this. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 8, 2013 19:44:10 GMT
Why is that frustrating? Why is it a problem if people keep talking about it? Guess I want to have solid concrete leads to talk about. Just seems from what I have read there isn't any for this one and that's why I find it frustrating. However, it is only because of slightly odd happenings such as this that people have been left wondering. It's the lack of clarity in the situation that causes a person to wonder if something might be happening on the missing episodes front. Of course, because no one is saying anything concrete, there is nothing concrete to pass along either.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 7, 2013 16:54:50 GMT
Agree with Tony here. John should point us in the direction of any site where all of the rumours are officially dead, certainly not dead on GB, OS, PM or ILF!! Or is it a case of if its dead in his view then thats all that counts? Whats the point in having a missing episodes forum if talk of these rumours is frowned upon? Until the BBC come out and say "there have been no returns, we have no more episodes to release" then Johns view that the rumours have been debunked has as much truth in it as a rogue cyberman tweet! I also agree with Tony and David. The only forum that isn't discussing any of this is Roobarbs where they've locked the thread. Other than that its as alive as it ever has been. C'mon folks, this is a MISSING EPISODES forum where we should be able to openly discuss possible missing episode returns? If we can't, can I suggest the forum name is changed? John, it does come down to you having a very closed view of any of this really. Anyone else who doesn't share your view is clearly wrong in your opinion. Theres a lot more to come on this. I don't think we're anywhere near the end of this roller coaster ride. By contrast, the rumor that 'Terror of the Zygons' will be the last DVD is apparently not 'officially dead' despite all evidence to the contrary on that one. It's always the other guy's rumor that's the dead one.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 6, 2013 22:49:20 GMT
Yes, a funeral-like 50th Anniversary. You aren't buying those other rumors involving John Hurt and the 12 regenerations? The only rumors I follow about anything at all are rumors of recoveries or leads on recoveries of 60s Doctor Who episodes. I'm not particularly invested in the modern series, so I'm not even familiar with that rumor you mention.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 6, 2013 22:40:40 GMT
OK, the wheels have turned and I've worked out that TWIS is The Wheel In Space However, that's a six parter and two survive. So how there can be two missing episodes ? Or hasn't the rumour been thought through ? I think the rumor is worked through - back to what we have in store for. Yes, a funeral-like 50th Anniversary.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 6, 2013 22:39:42 GMT
OK, the wheels have turned and I've worked out that TWIS is The Wheel In Space However, that's a six parter and two survive. So how there can be two missing episodes ? Or hasn't the rumour been thought through ? Oh, I can answer that one for you! Two episodes of The Wheel in Space are on Lost in Time, but the rumor of 90 missing episodes supposedly included two of the four missing episodes of The Wheel in Space. Then, there would just be two missing. However, a further rumor was that there might have been a lead on these final two missing episodes in Asia. Since I believe all rumors that I hear without question, I've made a place on my shelf for the newly recovered complete six-episode DVD of The Wheel in Space! :-)
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 6, 2013 3:31:09 GMT
Looks like I found some retro TV guide info for the Forth Worth area: radiodiscussions.com/smf/index.php?action=printpage;topic=126347.0This is a sample TV guide listing for Fort Worth/Dallas area from Tue, Mar 16, 1971. It may be that this site has others which could be checked. No sign of Doctor Who on this one yet tho. It may do to e-mail the person who posted the topic to see if he could look up any info for us, or to post a general query on the forum itself in regards to any TV guide listings for Fort Worth from that time frame. EDIT: This is the board on that site for Classic TV: radiodiscussions.com/smf/index.php?board=309.0This TV listing is very nostalgic for me. This was just the sort of line-up we had in Nebraska in 1971 when I was a little boy. It might help if the father of the individual who posted about this can remember details such as whether it was daytime or nighttime when he watched the show, what day of the week it might have been, and so forth. For example, I recall that when I was in second or third grade, 'The Goodies' was shown on our local public television station (channel 12) in Omaha, Nebraska on Sunday nights at 10:00 PM. They started with episodes from Series 3 (1973), except that they may have shown the kitten episode first, but none of the ones that no longer exist in color (unless it could have been the different edit of the kitten one). I missed the first week and saw 'The New Office' on the second week of the syndicated run. I believe it was shown only once with no repeats. Some years after it was cancelled, I called the Time-Life company and asked them if they might be planning to syndicate 'The Goodies' again in the U.S. The person looked up the list of programs they distributed and it was no longer listed, so she didn't even know what the show was. However, in the 1980s, I found someone who had recorded four episodes on a very early video recorder back in 1973, and I got copies on VHS from those early broadcasts that I still have. Therefore, videotaping in the early 1970s here would have been rare, but possible.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 6, 2013 3:02:20 GMT
This is indeed really good news. The last remaining story that could be released with two episodes of animated reconstructions would be 'The Crusade.' (That is, unless further episodes are recovered or it is deemed affordable to animate more than two missing episodes.) Or the Last 32 minutes could be UM2? ? on the "uncatalogued" ToTZ. I suppose it could be put on ToTZ, but that would be an unusual home for UM2.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 6, 2013 0:48:25 GMT
This is indeed really good news. The last remaining story that could be released with two episodes of animated reconstructions would be 'The Crusade.' (That is, unless further episodes are recovered or it is deemed affordable to animate more than two missing episodes.)
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 5, 2013 13:25:55 GMT
Tony, he has anonymous sources that can be trusted 110%. Unless you can produce anonymous sources that can be trusted 111% or more, you lose this argument. Are his anonymous sources more or less anonymous than mine? And who is working out these percentages, anyway? Yes, that was my point. I hope you understood me.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 5, 2013 4:53:08 GMT
A 'rumor' is when one does not know something firsthand but hears tell from someone else. Even if a source is named, as one of your three 'sources' was, it is not obvious that that individual has firsthand information either. In fact, you speak of Glen Allen's contacts (anonymous) that have informed him. These are the unnamed ‘those that would know for certain’ people. You do do anonymous sources. There is only rumor all around. It is entirely accurate to call your information a 'rumor' since it is third or fourth hand information with an unknown origin. But that's okay with me. I don't mind. As you say, until such time as something legitimate does indeed surface, we can just watch and wait. However, since this is a missing episodes thread, people can and will speculate, state opinions, pass along rumors, and so forth. So, you have your rumors, and others have theirs. His and my contacts are hardly anonymous when they post directly onto our personal facebook pages about it! Also, you've had several rebuttles from Paul Vanezis on here regarding the matter, a rather angry one from Philip Morris as well, so are you now suggesting they were just spouting rumours from anonymous sources too?! Anyway, I really can't be bothered with this anymore, so by all means 'assume' what you like about who and whatever you like, I think I'm done with this site now. Well, you named one of your conduits of information, but never any ultimate source (those people who would know for certain). These are your rumors, so I imagine you must be convinced by them, but they are still rumors in the form they appear in here. In other words, you yourself describe this as third-hand information that you received via your friend Allen who received it from others. Of course, I don't mind if you post this sort of thing. Your third-hand information may be as correct as anyone else's third-hand information. However, as far as I can tell, there have only been rumors circulating for the last 20 days. The statement from the BBC was non-committal. I don't quite know yet what to make of the various statements made as a whole. I'm following along and seeing what happens,. As for my assumptions, I definitely assume that key people such as Paul Vanezis and Philip Morris are speaking truthfully. If there have been missing episode recoveries, I would expect these recoveries to conform to what Mr. Vanezis and Mr. Morris have stated (barring some odd circumstance where they were somehow misinformed or something). I was only reacting to this rumors against rumors situation. There are lots of rumors flying in every direction lately and everyone's source is 110% credible. :-)
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 5, 2013 2:34:46 GMT
I don't question your identity, credentials or contacts. I just don't know why you would necessarily know anything more definite than others. You have your rumor mill of well-connected people that you would trust with your life etc., and others have theirs. We are all fairly uninformed. It's not a rumour mill at all as one of them is mentioned in some detail (including his name - I don't do anonymous sources!) on the very post I suggested those that have accused me of being someone else go check for clarification on the matter. Anyway, I wholeheartedly agree this debate has more than run its course now and until such time as something legitimate does indeed surface, I for one have said my piece about it all for now. A 'rumor' is when one does not know something firsthand but hears tell from someone else. Even if a source is named, as one of your three 'sources' was, it is not obvious that that individual has firsthand information either. In fact, you speak of Glen Allen's contacts (anonymous) that have informed him. These are the unnamed ‘those that would know for certain’ people. You do do anonymous sources. There is only rumor all around. It is entirely accurate to call your information a 'rumor' since it is third or fourth hand information with an unknown origin. But that's okay with me. I don't mind. As you say, until such time as something legitimate does indeed surface, we can just watch and wait. However, since this is a missing episodes thread, people can and will speculate, state opinions, pass along rumors, and so forth. So, you have your rumors, and others have theirs.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 5, 2013 1:34:04 GMT
Do you know these particular anonymous sources that can be trusted 110%? And, in all seriousness, why should Tony have to have sources that appear more reliable in order to win an argument that's actually a bit pointless??? I think Tony is being a bit unfairly treated here and, frankly, browbeaten. He's got his view, others have theirs. [stop accusing people of being Darren Gregory - RM] Please refer to my post about halfway down on page 17 of this thread, which should clarify a few things for you (and any others who still question my identity, credentials and contacts etc). I don't question your identity, credentials or contacts. I just don't know why you would necessarily know anything more definite than others. You have your rumor mill of well-connected people that you would trust with your life etc., and others have theirs. We are all fairly uninformed.
|
|
|
Post by Douglas Wulf on Jul 5, 2013 1:27:52 GMT
Tony, he has anonymous sources that can be trusted 110%. Unless you can produce anonymous sources that can be trusted 111% or more, you lose this argument. Do you know these particular anonymous sources that can be trusted 110%? And, in all seriousness, why should Tony have to have sources that appear more reliable in order to win an argument that's actually a bit pointless??? I think Tony is being a bit unfairly treated here and, frankly, browbeaten. He's got his view, others have theirs. [stop accusing people of being Darren Gregory - RM] Yes, that's exactly what I meant. … Well, so one person has more anonymous sources that are more reliable than another person's anonymous sources, etc., etc. Isn't it a bit pointless to stack up one person's rumors against another person's rumors?
|
|