29 of the 31 entries on the current page are tickers.
Three or four are mildly amusing at best.
Is this it from now on?
Nothing but shit tickers.
Is that the height of ambition nowadays?
Quick links: NewsBiscuit Home • Chat Room • Writers' Room • Top Ten
A new low?
(38 posts) (21 voices)
-
Well my excuse is I've got man flu so I'm not firing off all cylinders...(and I only fire off two at most in normal circumstances)
Don't know what excuses the other lot have got.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Isn't it a great Newsbiscuit tradition to whine about the number of crappy tickers that make no-one laugh? Where would we be without those hardworking men and women who give us the opportunity to say how shit they all are?
I think they're an art and if you get out of practice you lose the knack. Or you can be just be rubbish at them anyway, one or both of which is why I largely don't bother anymore.
What I want to see is thirty threads in the the chat room that are about how rubbish Newsbiscuit is and how nobody tries very hard anymore. That would be the pinnacle of my ambition.
Posted 3 years ago # -
My ambition was to post at lease one shit ticker but I've failed so far this year.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Er..despite being desperately ill I've made an effort - I'll collect my stars in heaven.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Andy has a point - tickers are a real art.
If new/inexperienced/less confident writers get discouraged from trying tickers, we will all be forced to endure overworked padding that detracts from (often wonderful) headlines.
Then they get even more discouraged and leave when the 'constructive feedback' is clumsy, harsh or easily misinterpreted.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I'm not sure that we have made entirely ad hominem attack here, as Gerry's character is not being question. Rather, we are variously pointing out that to gain currency for your arguments re state of submissions, one should really try yourself. Attacking others "ambition" whilst displaying none yourself is hardly firm ground to stand on.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Be completely sure that some have responded here with entirely ad hominem fallacies. Attacking an individual's ability or productivity are specifically 'ad hominem tu quoque' attacks. Gerontius may or may not be a hypocrite but, either way, that is a separate issue which has no bearing on the validity of his original point. Would you deny people the right to criticise politicians simply because they have no political credentials themselves?
Political debate, media discussion, and internet diatribe are plagued by logical fallacies. If everyone learned to spot them, then humanity might make some rational progress. Our Ministers are masters of sophistry, and little else. The Speaker of the House and every media host should be equipped with logical fallacy alarms, air horns, cattle prods and tasers.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Then things change, that's the thing about this site, it goes quiet then it goes mental.
True enough. There are also slow news/comedy days as well. You'll tend to find that the Editors will try to keep a few stories in reserve from the busy days to offset the slow.
Posted 3 years ago # -
But then how will we know it's you? :)
Posted 3 years ago # -
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.