|
|
Post by Ian Levine on Dec 28, 2009 18:51:36 GMT
In this case I think it's more likely that the programme makers took an editorial line which didn't involve you, which is their right. But I'd lay money here that neither you nor Mark Ayres volunteered my name forward. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Dec 28, 2009 18:55:57 GMT
You specifically said, unless I hallucinated, on that documentary, that the Reign Of Terror episodes were another notch on your belt. If that's not laying claim to their recovery, then I'm William Hartnell's toilet seat. Hmm. I never thought I'd hear Ian Levine admit he was William Hartnell's toilet seat. Yes, you did hallucinate. I never said it. I'll tell you what, why don't you listen to it again and find the section where I did say this? When you can't find it you can start posting the apology I deserve. |
|
|
|
Post by Greg H on Dec 28, 2009 18:58:30 GMT
then I'm William Hartnell's toilet seat. I think he means business guys. |
|
|
|
Post by Dale Rumbold on Dec 28, 2009 19:07:22 GMT
I guess it's not possible for you just to play nicely, guys?
I work in a (difficult) high-school and this is sounding very like Year-9 girls' stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Dec 28, 2009 19:12:04 GMT
I guess it's not possible for you just to play nicely, guys? I work in a (difficult) high-school and this is sounding very like Year-9 girls' stuff. Have you been called a liar across the internet recently Dale? |
|
|
|
Post by Jessie Orta on Dec 28, 2009 19:23:42 GMT
I enjoyed the documentary, and I would be hard pressed to call it " Woefully Inaccurate Rubbish". I however am a bit miffed as to why Ian was not mentioned or interviewed. I half expected him to pop in from time to time and comment. I understand some people feel that his statements have been heard before but this program was not necessarily aimed at the fan base (who would be familiar with his comments) and was for a wider audience that would have benefited form his input. My opinion of course. By the way Paul I appreciate everything you have and are doing. I also have a very strong appreciation for Ian for what he has and continues to do, so I wish you both the best.
Jessie Orta
|
|
|
|
Post by Dale Rumbold on Dec 28, 2009 19:44:59 GMT
I guess it's not possible for you just to play nicely, guys? I work in a (difficult) high-school and this is sounding very like Year-9 girls' stuff. Have you been called a liar across the internet recently Dale? No. And I understand why you are aggrieved. I can also see why Mr Levine feels aggrieved. I just feel that you 2 slagging each other off on here is not helpful to anyone, including yourself. I speak as someone who is a past-master of electronic arguments (not on here), all of which have left me feeling worse than if I hadn't entered into them. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Dec 28, 2009 21:48:09 GMT
I just feel that you 2 slagging each other off on here is not helpful to anyone, including yourself. I speak as someone who is a past-master of electronic arguments (not on here), all of which have left me feeling worse than if I hadn't entered into them. Hi Dale, We're not slagging each other off. Ian is calling me a liar. I am not a liar and I've asked Ian to apologise. So far he hasn't. Ian never wants to admit he is wrong even when the facts are incontrovertible. I have nothing against Ian, but I am not prepared to be called a liar. I just want him to apologise and ensure my good name isn't besmirched. Regards, Paul |
|
|
|
Post by jontravers on Dec 28, 2009 22:15:23 GMT
Narrator: "As an episode hunter himself, Paul Vanesiz has three notches on his belt. He found the first three episodes from the 1964 story "The Reign of Terror" in an archive in Cyprus. Phil is still searching."
Paul is correct in saying that he did not say he was responsible for the recovery. As I said earlier, the errors lie with the Producer and Researcher, not with the contributors.
Ian, it was rather harsh to call Paul a liar, especially in a public arena. We all know what you have done, and IMHO, the programme would have benefited from your input.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Dec 29, 2009 0:47:23 GMT
Narrator: "As an episode hunter himself, Paul Vanesiz has three notches on his belt. He found the first three episodes from the 1964 story "The Reign of Terror" in an archive in Cyprus. Phil is still searching." Jon, many thanks for this. The fact is I did indeed discover the first three episodes of 'The Reign of Terror' were in Cyprus. I never did though claim I had any involvement in the recovery or return of the episodes. The only person who has claimed I said I did is Ian. All I have done in the past is report the facts; that I sent a letter asking if the Cyprus Broadcasting Corporation ever screened 'Doctor Who' and if they did, did they still have any episodes. They replied in the positive and the rest is history. What I can't do is rewrite history. I just reported back in 1984, some 25 years ago that I discovered 'The Reign of Terror'. It was widely reported then and has been common knowledge since. I'm not claiming anything other than the fact I discovered three missing episodes of 'Doctor Who'. I had no knowledge at the time of the BBC's efforts in recovering episodes from overseas, nor of Ian's involvement in that effort. As is evidenced from the letter I received from the CBC , I did in fact locate the material some substantial period before the BBC ever sent their telex. This is past history, some 25 years ago and in my distant memory. But it does not mean that it didn't happen just because Ian Levine says it didn't. The fact that the BBC's efforts in retrieving material from abroad, including Cyprus was fruitful gives me immense pleasure. In terms of Cyprus it solved quite a few problems for me. But it doesn't take away from me the fact I can tell people I discovered three missing episodes of 'Doctor Who', my favourite series at the time. Perhaps nobody ever told Ian of my find (although I did in 1984, a telephone call he has conveniently forgotten) but if he has indeed forgotten or was never told of my involvement it would of course come as some surprise. What is unforgiveable is, after accusing me of saying something I didn't and calling me a liar and then being presented with the evidence from so many people that I did indeed discover the material all those years ago, he is still not prepared to apologise. It's not my place to say whether Ian should have been involved in the documentary or not. In fact, it's nobody's place other than the programme makers. Only they know what sort of programme they wanted to make. In a free society we allow creative people to make their own choices about what they include in a programme. The general public can decide what they feel about this particular programme and by all accounts it has been successful. But programme makers decide the content of the programmes they want to make. As soon as we allow others to decide for them we have programme making by committee. We have the privileged few deciding for others who should hear what version of history they decide is correct. From what Ian has said in the past few days, he is one of those people who thinks his version of events and his alone is the one you should hear despite the evidence of what is already in the public domain. Ian hasn't provided me with the apology I sought and deserved and has attempted to blacken my name amongst the fans of 'Doctor Who' around the world. I think this is unfair, especially considering that all I did was to make a contribution to a radio documentary and tell my personal story. Ian is now banned from this forum until such time as the owner of it, Mark Brown decides he can return or Ian provides me, and forum members with the courtesy of an apology. Regards, Paul |
|
