The new studio and the interviews were awful! LFF shows why he should never have guests because he cannot do an entertaining interview. With both Bell and Goff he was equally boring. And of course he blames Bell for his failure since he hates all weather people. We get to hear about his sad drive past the old bar where "luck" is the only reason it is successful today, right fatso.

Yes, if they continue to have guests, the inevitable self-destruction of this failcast will accelerate rapidly.

Horrible.

Blobb Spewsack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, if they continue to have guests, the
> inevitable self-destruction of this failcast will
> accelerate rapidly.
>
> Horrible.

I will be shocked, shocked I tell you, if Don on RELM is not mentioned at least ONCE on today's TMOS show. I may actually listen for once. It is THE elephant in the room.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I might like TMOS more if I didn't think I'd become a TMOS fan.

Ermagerd Drted Rfrnce Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Radio is free.
>
> Let's not get stuck in the semantics.
>
> By your argument, it isn't free because you need
> to buy something to listen to it on.
>
> As long as there has been media, there have been
> advertisements. It does not mean that the content
> isn't free for the listener. If you don't like
> the commercials, that's fine. But don't get all
> conceptual about the difference between "liquid"
> capital and "intellectual" capital.


Which part of this supports your original claim?

If you write or speak you are stuck in semantics.

I didn't bring up the equipment point, but you are right, this adds to the non-free status.

Just because people have referred to something a certain way for a long time does that mean it's true? If I tell you I can fly everyday for the next 90 years will you believe me?

Your last example. I think instead of liquid capital you mean physical property, liquid refers to capital that is ,usually easily, able to be turned into money. there would be no way to define a difference between the two you used.

If that is not what you meant please clarify. If it is then there really isn't much difference between physical property and intellectual property in value, it's worth what two parties(buyer and seller) decide it is.

BIGSAC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The new studio and the interviews were awful! LFF
> shows why he should never have guests because he
> cannot do an entertaining interview. With both
> Bell and Goff he was equally boring. And of
> course he blames Bell for his failure since he
> hates all weather people. We get to hear about
> his sad drive past the old bar where "luck" is the
> only reason it is successful today, right fatso.

Mike can't do an interview without making it all about himself.

Curious Bob Hope Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I will be shocked, shocked I tell you, if Don on
> RELM is not mentioned at least ONCE on today's
> TMOS show. I may actually listen for once. It is
> THE elephant in the room.


Keep the portable defibrillator nearby, I have mine in case it does get mentioned.

The interviews were worse than the vignettes? C'mon now.

There's at least a 40% chance that Mike doesn't mention Don's show.

I've got a pork chop on standby

ar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BIGSAC Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The new studio and the interviews were awful!
> LFF
> > shows why he should never have guests because
> he
> > cannot do an entertaining interview. With both
> > Bell and Goff he was equally boring. And of
> > course he blames Bell for his failure since he
> > hates all weather people. We get to hear about
> > his sad drive past the old bar where "luck" is
> the
> > only reason it is successful today, right
> fatso.
>
> Mike can't do an interview without making it all
> about himself.

LFF can't do ANYTHING without making it all about himself. That's why he's just like a Hell's Angel. And an EMT. And a hockey player. And a war hero. And a cop. And so on . . .

bubbyman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Blobb Spewsack Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It wasn't announced previously, they (oscar, I
> > think) just made it sound that way through FB
> and
> > twitter.
>
> That's what I thought to but I wanted to make
> sure. If we hurry, we can make peekza miss one.


Miss what?

Startin off the show with a Ah-nold impression huh? Maybe we're feeling the pressure and feel the need to step it up?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I might like TMOS more if I didn't think I'd become a TMOS fan.

I have studiously avoided all of the preceding argument about the definition of 'free.' I define free as not having to go into my pocket to get money. If a podcast has commercials it may in some way not be theoretically 'free,' but those commercials are easily fast-forwarded. Every Carolla podcast starts with commercials. If I'm not thinking about buying strawberries that day, I just FF. So, it is free enough. Besides, if I need giant strawberries I can listen to that 'for free' and get a deal.

Everyone wins.

Never mind peekza, my mistake. You know

344...Semper Fat...
Attachments:

enzo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have studiously avoided all of the preceding
> argument about the definition of 'free.' I define
> free as not having to go into my pocket to get
> money. If a podcast has commercials it may in
> some way not be theoretically 'free,' but those
> commercials are easily fast-forwarded. Every
> Carolla podcast starts with commercials. If I'm
> not thinking about buying strawberries that day, I
> just FF. So, it is free enough. Besides, if I
> need giant strawberries I can listen to that 'for
> free' and get a deal.
>
> Everyone wins.

Oh enzo. I wasn't trying to make it personal. I just wanted to make my point, thats all.

bubbyman Wrote:

> Which part of this supports your original claim?
>
> If you write or speak you are stuck in semantics.
>
> I didn't bring up the equipment point, but you are
> right, this adds to the non-free status.
>
> Just because people have referred to something a
> certain way for a long time does that mean it's
> true? If I tell you I can fly everyday for the
> next 90 years will you believe me?
>
> Your last example. I think instead of liquid
> capital you mean physical property, liquid refers
> to capital that is ,usually easily, able to be
> turned into money. there would be no way to define
> a difference between the two you used.
>
> If that is not what you meant please clarify. If
> it is then there really isn't much difference
> between physical property and intellectual
> property in value, it's worth what two
> parties(buyer and seller) decide it is.

We are talking about standard linguistic and societal norms. Yes. Nothing is truly free. A coupon for a free sandwich is not free because it costs you time and effort and potentially money to make your way to the specific restaurant.
The crappy "Express" newspaper on the DC Metro isn't free because there are advertisements which detract from the consumer's ability to receive nothing but content. You are always trading one thing for another. Someone comes over to help you move...you are now obligated to help them move at a later date. Again, not free.

But as a society, and as English speakers, 99 times out of 100 the word "Free" means "with no monetary cost."

You are making an intellectual/theoretical argument that does not need to be had on this topic. You seem to be arguing that we are paying for TMOS just as much as we would be paying for Don's...that somehow they are equal. But it isn't true on any tangible, realistic level. It is a purely theoretical argument, just for the sake of making an theoretical argument.

It isn't the same. TMOS is free. The bonus shows aren't. Nerdist is free. Corolla is free. Netflix is not free. Hulu is. Hulu Plus isn't.

The bar failure is just a bit. Why do you think Rob keeps playing the, "If you have a failing restaurant..." clip? It was a really successful neighborhood bar. O'Meara sold it because 5 years later he was planning to move to FL.

Hank's Lookaround Cafe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can understand why Mike is sad about the
> bar...the bar Don told him not to buy because it
> would be a money pit. The bar with all the
> ridiculous ABC violations like running Happy Hour
> at all hours of the night and giving away free
> booze to Mike's friends. The bar that stiffed its
> employees. The bar Mike expected to throw off
> enough profit to pay off Mike's underwater 1903
> Vic.
>
> Obviously Mike didn't get a degree in business, or
> common sense, from AU.

enzo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have studiously avoided all of the preceding
> argument about the definition of 'free.' I define
> free as not having to go into my pocket to get
> money. If a podcast has commercials it may in
> some way not be theoretically 'free,' but those
> commercials are easily fast-forwarded. Every
> Carolla podcast starts with commercials. If I'm
> not thinking about buying strawberries that day, I
> just FF. So, it is free enough. Besides, if I
> need giant strawberries I can listen to that 'for
> free' and get a deal.
>
> Everyone wins.

I really don't have a problem with anyone using it that way, if that's how you think about it. It's just that when someone gets attacked for using it, properly in my opinion, it's annoying to me. that's why I usually put quotes around it when I am using the original meaning of it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2014 01:30PM by bubbyman.

Ermagerd Drted Rfrnce, above goes to you too, I understand that words can change meaning, but this argument originally started with misquotes.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2014 12:23PM by bubbyman.

exffx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The bar failure is just a bit. Why do you think
> Rob keeps playing the, "If you have a failing
> restaurant..." clip? It was a really successful
> neighborhood bar. O'Meara sold it because 5 years
> later he was planning to move to FL.
>
> Hank's Lookaround Cafe Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I can understand why Mike is sad about the
> > bar...the bar Don told him not to buy because
> it
> > would be a money pit. The bar with all the
> > ridiculous ABC violations like running Happy
> Hour
> > at all hours of the night and giving away free
> > booze to Mike's friends. The bar that stiffed
> its
> > employees. The bar Mike expected to throw off
> > enough profit to pay off Mike's underwater 1903
> > Vic.
> >
> > Obviously Mike didn't get a degree in business,
> or
> > common sense, from AU.


Mike was so willing to commit to the bit that he didn't pay his employees their last paychecks

Cary: Glad I pay the bills. Means I won't have to explain to a certain someone the credit card charge for @DonGeronimoShow's new podcast.

Don't you "get it?" Mike is just playing a CHARACTER! Remember when he closed the bar due to ABC fines? That was just a "bit!" Blowing his knee out at Hooters? A bit! Having a falling out with Buzz and RJ on the air leading them to quit? A bit! Buzz and RJ are both putting on an act! See, there's no way Mike actually threw a suitcase at his pregnant wife or bought a snowblower on the show's tab and pocketed the money when he sold it! It has to be a bit. Otherwise, he would be an unforgivable asshole.

By the way, I just discovered another super high quality free podcast and what not:

The Duncan Trussell Family Hour.

Live it. Believe it. Know it. Breath it. Pinch it.

Wow, lot of impressions on today's show. No mention of teh elephant though.

Someone's feeling the pressure...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I might like TMOS more if I didn't think I'd become a TMOS fan.

duncan trussell -- that was the dude that was on joe rogan questions everything -- funny dude!

Curious Bob Hope Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow, lot of impressions on today's show. No
> mention of teh elephant though.
>
> Someone's feeling the pressure...


It will not get mentioned

Cary and Carla Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cary: Glad I pay the bills. Means I won't have to
> explain to a certain someone the credit card
> charge for @DonGeronimoShow's new podcast.

Rob will buy it as well...and wonder "what if he had quit too"

Don't forget the numerous bits where he doesn't pay his bills. Those are real funny.

Or when he goes mental on the furnace guy, the termite guy, and the lawn guys. All classic O'Meara bits.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2014 01:07PM by exffx.

A message to David M and anyone else coming here from the Facebook TMOS Fan Club:

Not everyone here is awful. But some of them are. I don't come here to talk nasty about Mike's kids. I don't like the posts here that cross the line into inappropriate. Many of the people here are current or former fans of the show who believe that Mike (and Robb) have destroyed their own show. They have hurt the show through both inaction and poor decisions. Many of us want the show to be great. Many of us think it could be great. That's part of why it is so upsetting to see what it has become. I stopped listening, but I still come here to discuss/follow what's happening.

Let me ask some questions:

1. Why is the fan club so afraid of criticism?

2. Do you really think the show is as good as it could be?

3. The show has not grown since its inception. There is PROOF of this. If you have less listeners than when you started, isn't that a failure? Shouldn't you change the formula?

4. The TMOS Bonus shows cost $75.00 per year for up to 65 hours of content. This comes to $1.15 per hour. Don's show costs $85.00 per year for up to 480 hours of content. (Don has stated he will take 4 weeks vacation.) This comes to $0.18 per hour. Why is it so hard for the TMOS Fan Club to believe that people would pay for this? Many of you already pay almost that much and get much less for your money. It's only $10 more for almost 8 times the content!



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2014 02:03PM by TMOS Stats.

Yeah, you'd think if these were characters or inflations of the truth for show's sake, they'd at least be entertaining.

So instead of being in a drunken stupor and throwing a suitcase at his pregnant wife, Mike was actually just buzzed and threw a carry on bag at his pregnant wife? Oh...NOW I "get it."

Why is Mike so poor at it? Look at the attention/new subs/publicity Don is getting through his twitter. Does Mike even know how to tweet? I'm not picking a fight, just a reasonable question.

No, Mike lives and dies by Facebook on his "Mac Airbook".

FREE is FREE. You can always hit the fast forward button during commercials. I use Beyond Pod. So I listen to the content I want to. I do this on all podcasts I listen. Adam Carolla's, Steve Austin, Adam and Dr. Drew.

This all goes back to my original point, a paid podcast will not work long term vs. ads with FREE content.

Think about years ago with Net Zero, people never bought the paid service. There is not one top podcast that's a paid only. No need to reinvent the wheel. Don is not SiriusXM and doesn't have the drawing power to sustain.

Just my 2 cents.

Enough already, Dons Blackberry.

Time will tell.

Because Mike doesn't know how to promote himself and be relevant.

Anyone who is self employed or owns his own business learns this before day 1.

He expects his listeners to do all the work. Remember that 1000th show thing?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2014 01:39PM by exffx.

I have a subscription podcast that makes me BIG TIME $$$$
So does Tom Leykis
So does Marc Maron

Don's will make him $$$. If not your money, good for you.
But knock off this pandering defensive protection of Mike.
It's rather transparent.

If Mike worked on making a better product instead of these posts, he'd be getting somewhere.

Here's the difference between the two business-wise, if Don is wrong, and he's not making money, he'll change it. But Mike won't change anything even after being shown he's wrong.
Don has said that for 85 dollar's now, he's going to give you 10 hours of content a week. The only real question I have about this is how many vacations will he be taking because that will affect the price per episode. But as far as it goes he hasn't yet taken my money and not delivered. While Mike has continually under delivered on paid for podcasts and merchandise.
There is no one that can tell you or me whether or not this will work for Don, ask in about 6-8 months and there will be some type of answer, I'll tell you if he's getting any more money from me then.

And from the most poular FB fan club post ever, Patrick is looking for someone to split a Don subscription with.

CelebrityNetWorth.Com
Don Geronimo:

10 MILLION BUCKS

Do you really think he "needs" the money like LFF?

He is obviously doing what he wants on his terms and will make a little cake on top. So here's 10 million reasons to fuck off.

I'm full of money, Don's black berry.

I DM'ed Don about the vacation, and he said he'll be upfront. Four weeks off a year. He wrote one week Xmas Sat Pats Day 4th July and Labor Day. So I'm in that's about half the time he used to take, I can live with it. And unlike Mike, he answered right away and honestly.

Get a writer, a producer. Someone who can work with whatever talent you still have.
Lose Rob at once.

So, I didn't have the strength to listen to TMOS.

Was the elephant in the room mentioned at all?

johnny b Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I DM'ed Don about the vacation, and he said he'll
> be upfront. Four weeks off a year. He wrote one
> week Xmas Sat Pats Day 4th July and Labor Day. So
> I'm in that's about half the time he used to take,
> I can live with it. And unlike Mike, he answered
> right away and honestly.


that's better than I thought. Around 56 cents a week buying it now, not too bad.

Not sure about your math, but it's around $1.77 per week.

Blobb Spewsack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, I didn't have the strength to listen to TMOS.
>
> Was the elephant in the room mentioned at all?


Not while I was listening. I had to punch out around halfway through, though. I seriously doubt it.

bubbyman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And from the most poular FB fan club post ever,
> Patrick is looking for someone to split a Don
> subscription with.

bubby, I don't know why, but this had me fucking rolling. They are just a world class bunch of cheap shitheads.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2014 02:10PM by Curious Bob Hope.

TMOS Stats Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not sure about your math, but it's around $1.77
> per week.


I divided the wrong way. I've been up way too long.

There is exactly one reason Mike doesn't do his show on a subscription model (well, two, if you count the fact that nobody associated with TMOS probably knows how to set such a thing up): people won't pay for TMOS. I suspect if there was the remotest possibility that MORE thought they could make money that way, they'd do it. But it won't, and they know it.

They don't offer the show for "free" because they're deeply committed to the principle that quality radio entertainment should be free for the masses. They do it because they correctly assume that almost nobody would keep listening to their product over the long-term if it wasn't free.

And btw-- enough with the bit about how there are so many awesome podcasts out there for free. No, actually, there aren't. There are a lot of podcasts out there, yes, some better than others. But over the long term, you generally get what you pay for. Even particularly popular episodes of "free" podcasts are often only offered for a fee afterward (for example, Marc Maron's interviews of Carlos Mencia, or the "Retraction" episode of "This American Life"). I suppose you could load up on "free" podcasts and be proud of yourself that you're not paying for entertainment-- but your commitment to freebies will eventually shut you out of the higher quality stuff.

Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HonkForCash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Has LLF acknowledged the Donnie news on the
> show?
> > Even if through veiled jokes.
>
>
> Why would he? Does Pepsi acknowledge Coke?
>
> Just my 2 cents.


Did Pepsi and Coke have a 20 year career working together? You keep trying to make these points are they're just simple-minded. You are also a massive enabler with Mike. I really hope you aren't like this in real life. The suitcase was not a "bit". If it was a bit, Mike would've wrote some horrible vignette or made up a voice for the suitcase. Mike said "a suitcase may have been thrown", and that was the last time it was mentioned. You seriously can't think that's a bit, right? You're not that blind I hope. He wasn't doing a bit, he wasn't exaggerating. He was having a quick 1 minute conversation about a fight and he threw in that a suitcase was thrown before he changed the topic and started doing his bits and following the normal show path.

Like one poster before me said, if everything is a bit and exaggerated for comedy to you, the buzz situation must be a bit, RJ must be a bit, stealing money for the snowblower is a bit, selling his failed bar is a bit, moving to Florida because he can't afford his home anymore must be a bit. You really think highly of Mike huh? He must Andy Kaufman-esque in your mind.

bubbyman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I divided the wrong way. I've been up way too
> long.

Fun stuff: watch DCRTV Dave repeatedly try to do the math on Don's new podcast (the calculations start around the 3:00 mark).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtlDr4cW5rU&list=UUorqPb6XxvAJzMNgwyXTR4A

The thing that has never made sense to me about TMOS is the studio.

If you work backwards from the reveal, it comes out to somewhere around a month or two after the Home Studio makeover was when Mike made the decision to move. (I have estimated math, and did not want to bog down the post with it, but it works out.)

So there is this huge effort to make over a studio that none of the viewers or listeners really care about, that will be gone before it potentially can create any real return. (Whatever return it might be)

Now the new studio makes more sense because of the rental possibilities, but come on guys, just say that instead of talking about these guests that nobody cares about...because I guarantee, any guest that we WOULD care about, will have no interest in essentially doing a phoner, since the host is in a different state!

Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mom meh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Only you and that other guy with 5 different
> > accounts commented on his post. Not sure how
> that
> > makes me the first person out of four unless
> you
> > count all of the multiple personalities of that
> > one poster. And at no point did I say it was
> > clever. Please don't put words in my mouth. I
> said
> > it was obvious sarcasm. Not sure how you tried
> to
> > spin me saying something is obvious sarcasm
> into
> > calling it clever. This is a no spin zone here.
> We
> > aren't passive aggressive, we don't delete
> posts,
> > and we don't make half-assed attempts at
> spinning
> > what someone says. Welcome.
>
> And from Bill O'Reilly, "Talking Points".
>
> Just my 2 cents.

I've never watched Bill O'Reilly. I don't even live in your country. But again, thanks for assuming something about me based on your prejudices. Get out if your box. You're seriously delusional.

Ermagerd Drted Rfrnce Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The thing that has never made sense to me about
> TMOS is the studio.
>
> If you work backwards from the reveal, it comes
> out to somewhere around a month or two after the
> Home Studio makeover was when Mike made the
> decision to move. (I have estimated math, and did
> not want to bog down the post with it, but it
> works out.)
>
> So there is this huge effort to make over a studio
> that none of the viewers or listeners really care
> about, that will be gone before it potentially can
> create any real return. (Whatever return it might
> be)
>
> Now the new studio makes more sense because of the
> rental possibilities, but come on guys, just say
> that instead of talking about these guests that
> nobody cares about...because I guarantee, any
> guest that we WOULD care about, will have no
> interest in essentially doing a phoner, since the
> host is in a different state!

It was a "bit". That's the new excuse for anything negative a fishy brought up here. Bit bit bit bit. That way I don't need to actually think about it and realize that maybe Mike isn't a saint. Bit bit bit bit. He's not in trouble financially. Bit bit. He didn't alienate buzz, RJ and Marc with his extreme asshole personality. Bit bit bit.

OaktonWhineShop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is exactly one reason Mike doesn't do his
> show on a subscription model (well, two, if you
> count the fact that nobody associated with TMOS
> probably knows how to set such a thing up): people
> won't pay for TMOS. I suspect if there was the
> remotest possibility that MORE thought they could
> make money that way, they'd do it. But it won't,
> and they know it.
>
> They don't offer the show for "free" because
> they're deeply committed to the principle that
> quality radio entertainment should be free for the
> masses. They do it because they correctly assume
> that almost nobody would keep listening to their
> product over the long-term if it wasn't free.
>
> And btw-- enough with the bit about how there are
> so many awesome podcasts out there for free. No,
> actually, there aren't. There are a lot of
> podcasts out there, yes, some better than others.
> But over the long term, you generally get what you
> pay for. Even particularly popular episodes of
> "free" podcasts are often only offered for a fee
> afterward (for example, Marc Maron's interviews of
> Carlos Mencia, or the "Retraction" episode of
> "This American Life"). I suppose you could load up
> on "free" podcasts and be proud of yourself that
> you're not paying for entertainment-- but your
> commitment to freebies will eventually shut you
> out of the higher quality stuff.

Not being a troll here...honestly asking...what subscription based podcasts do you listen to?
Not talking about the occasional paid episodes like the ones you mention above...but real, full, subscription only podcasts?

Didn't think so.

Fuckheads.

Mike O'Meara Rules!

Bill Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Didn't think so.
>
> Fuckheads.
>
> Mike O'Meara Rules!

- goes to a forum and posts a question
- doesn't get an answer in 21 minutes
- declares himself a winner

TMOS Fan logic.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I might like TMOS more if I didn't think I'd become a TMOS fan.

Does anyone use a podcast for their main revenue?

Seems like it works better as a supplement to the overall product.

OaktonWhineShop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bubbyman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I divided the wrong way. I've been up way too
> > long.
>
> Fun stuff: watch DCRTV Dave repeatedly try to do
> the math on Don's new podcast (the calculations
> start around the 3:00 mark).
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtlDr4cW5rU&list=U
> UorqPb6XxvAJzMNgwyXTR4A


That is one creepy dude

Curious Bob Hope Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bill Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Didn't think so.
> >
> > Fuckheads.
> >
> > Mike O'Meara Rules!
>
> - goes to a forum and posts a question
> - doesn't get an answer in 21 minutes
> - declares himself a winner
>
> TMOS Fan logic.


I know right...you know that 21 minutes felt like an eternity...

Curious Bob Hope Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bill Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Didn't think so.
> >
> > Fuckheads.
> >
> > Mike O'Meara Rules!
>
> - goes to a forum and posts a question
> - doesn't get an answer in 21 minutes
> - declares himself a winner
>
> TMOS Fan logic.

HA

Aliece updated the TMOS Fan page graphic.

Look at this mess:

-
Attachments:

peekza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OaktonWhineShop Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > bubbyman Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > I divided the wrong way. I've been up way too
> > > long.
> >
> > Fun stuff: watch DCRTV Dave repeatedly try to
> do
> > the math on Don's new podcast (the calculations
> > start around the 3:00 mark).
> >
> >
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtlDr4cW5rU&list=U
>
> > UorqPb6XxvAJzMNgwyXTR4A
>
>
> That is one creepy dude

Heard Don bash him for years as such. Don waaay undersold it.

Sweet! I didn't know he did youtube videos.

I like the way he needed a calculator to multiply something by 100.

Blobb Spewsack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I like the way he needed a calculator to multiply
> something by 100.


and he still got it wrong!

As already mentioned Steve Dahl ' Tom Leykis ' Marc Maron

It has/ is being done. Just superior talent with dedicated fan bases.
Yes, Don makes the cut there.

You people here continue to amaze me with your low character. Truly, you are bottom dwellers. None of you should be proud of posting here.

Michael Stuart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You people here continue to amaze me with your low
> character. Truly, you are bottom dwellers. None of
> you should be proud of posting here.


Oh Michael. You just can't quit us, can you?

Lose your butthurt attitude and come have a chuckle.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I might like TMOS more if I didn't think I'd become a TMOS fan.

bobafeet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wife and i make about 250k a year together...just
> getting by in fairfax..I wont pay for dons
> podcast. Simple: I only listen to podcasts in the
> car, to and from work. A little over an hour is
> all i need when you throw in the
> radio/traffic/weather/missing airplane, latest
> crap breaking news story. I dont need more than
> one pod cast. I imagine my demo is pretty similar
> to a lot of fans of whatever show. Why would I
> pay for a bonus TMOS or dons podcast? Its only
> for the commute to and from work, and then its
> just background noise really. And dont fool
> yourselves...Don's talent level is about the same
> as mike's. They not ground breakers, they not
> comedic gold...its just noise to get you thru the
> commute for most. I dont pay for car cockpit
> noise.
>
> One thing; that mark and lowell show is more than
> noise, its finger nails on the blackboard noise,
> quint from jaws stuff. That show is awful.
>
> One more thing; If Im doing yard work or working
> around the house I will get a cuouple of hours to
> binge with, but again, thats free, a corolla or
> some other guy, and thats maybe twice a month

So you and the wife make a lot of money and you are too busy to listen. How does that add to the conversation? who in the fuck cares? Also it's been my experience that people who have a lot of cash are cheap asses.

Yes, I'm a low character. So low, in fact, that I might even throw a suitcase at my pregnant wife. But, lo, even I'm not that low.

Michael Stuart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You people here continue to amaze me with your low
> character. Truly, you are bottom dwellers. None of
> you should be proud of posting here.


Too bad you can't close this Fan Club to the public huh?

I loved the hilarious comedy bit where Mike quit paying his lawnservice bill and they suspended his service...truly a jaw-unhinger...

The funniest part of that bit was when O'Meara pretended to be mad at them for not coming. It sounded so real. It was like he really expected them to come after not paying. Mike O'Meara deserves an Oscar for his acting.

exffx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The funniest part of that bit was when O'Meara
> pretended to be mad at them for not coming. It
> sounded so real. It was like he really expected
> them to come after not paying. Mike O'Meara
> deserves an Oscar for his acting.


It actually was funny when he talked about getting his "revenge" by firing them...Uh...how do fire a company whose service you quit paying for? "You're not getting anymore of the $ I'm not paying to begin with" He's doing them a favor...

Michael Stuart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You people here continue to amaze me with your low
> character. Truly, you are bottom dwellers. None of
> you should be proud of posting here.


Michael, I'm going to refrain from doing what I really want and just ripping into your post. I'm going to be nice. I've seen you post here a few times calling posters here bottom-dwellers or parents basement living losers (both overused cliches that Mike uses also on a daily basis). After you post, there's always 4 or 5 of the good posters here that respond to you with good points and questions to you. You always ignore these posts and simply re-post about how the posters here are losers.

I'm seriously asking you why you do this? There definitely ARE some bottom-dwellers here that are kind of creepy, but 90% of the main posters are normal people with normal lives that used to live Don and Mike and use this site because it's the only site you can speak freely without being banned. Do you have any idea how many fan club members have been forced here because your club banned them for having a negative opinion? Why is this so hard for you and your fan club friends to understand?

Are the mean posts here? Of fucking course there is. We were all Din and Mike fans, so what the fuck do you think our humour is going to entail? We don't laugh at monkeys ripping faces off though or making jokes when actors die (that's truly what a bottom-dweller does). We make jokes about "full mike" and suitcases and porkchops and foreclosures. But again, 90% of the posters here would be ecstatic if Mike did a 180 and started putting out a truly hilarious product that made him a fortune. There's a few here tat would be mad because they actively route for Mike's failure, but they're in the minority.

I don't know why I wasted my time writing this to you, because I know you'll do what every other fanclubber does here. Ignore the 10 good, thoughtful posts and focus on the one negative so you can continue with your fallacy that everyone here is a bottom-feeding troll.

TMOS should do a "Best bits of the year". Have loyal listeners vote on the best bits.

I would probably vote on the "Franky shits in the studio" bit. That's awesome dog training right there.

LOLscar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Michael Stuart Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You people here continue to amaze me with your
> low
> > character. Truly, you are bottom dwellers. None
> of
> > you should be proud of posting here.
>
>
> Michael, I'm going to refrain from doing what I
> really want and just ripping into your post. I'm
> going to be nice. I've seen you post here a few
> times calling posters here bottom-dwellers or
> parents basement living losers (both overused
> cliches that Mike uses also on a daily basis).
> After you post, there's always 4 or 5 of the good
> posters here that respond to you with good points
> and questions to you. You always ignore these
> posts and simply re-post about how the posters
> here are losers.
>
> I'm seriously asking you why you do this? There
> definitely ARE some bottom-dwellers here that are
> kind of creepy, but 90% of the main posters are
> normal people with normal lives that used to live
> Don and Mike and use this site because it's the
> only site you can speak freely without being
> banned. Do you have any idea how many fan club
> members have been forced here because your club
> banned them for having a negative opinion? Why is
> this so hard for you and your fan club friends to
> understand?
>
> Are the mean posts here? Of fucking course there
> is. We were all Din and Mike fans, so what the
> fuck do you think our humour is going to entail?
> We don't laugh at monkeys ripping faces off though
> or making jokes when actors die (that's truly what
> a bottom-dweller does). We make jokes about "full
> mike" and suitcases and porkchops and
> foreclosures. But again, 90% of the posters here
> would be ecstatic if Mike did a 180 and started
> putting out a truly hilarious product that made
> him a fortune. There's a few here tat would be mad
> because they actively route for Mike's failure,
> but they're in the minority.
>
> I don't know why I wasted my time writing this to
> you, because I know you'll do what every other
> fanclubber does here. Ignore the 10 good,
> thoughtful posts and focus on the one negative so
> you can continue with your fallacy that everyone
> here is a bottom-feeding troll.

I,for one, wouldn't mind if Mike tried harder...or at all...

exffx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TMOS should do a "Best bits of the year". Have
> loyal listeners vote on the best bits.
>
> I would probably vote on the "Franky shits in the
> studio" bit. That's awesome dog training right
> there.


I like the bit where he gets insanely jealous of anyone else's success...Of course the "I'm on a diet" and "I'm beginning a new exercise regimen" are hilarious as well...

I think they have toned down Spewak's dumb racist comments. Or at least called him out on it instead of laughing with him. That's one on the plus side.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2014 06:00PM by exffx.

LOLscar should be commended for having the patience to write all that. Well done to you sir, and I 100% agree with everything you said.

I would be ecstatic if Mike could do a show that I was invested in. I don't see how that could be possible though - it seems stuck in geriatric territory, which is very sad to me.

exffx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think they have toned down Spewak's dumb racist
> comments. Or at least called him out on it instead
> of laughing with him. That's one on the plus side.


I love how they try to play that off as a "bit"...Like he's not really a bigot...And he did play the Asian music for Angie Goff(who responded awkwardly), so there is that...

Ah. I thought he stopped doing that.

Missed comedic moment if he didn't refer to her as Chinaman Angie Goff. That would have made everyone in the room LOL.

exffx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TMOS should do a "Best bits of the year". Have
> loyal listeners vote on the best bits.
>
> I would probably vote on the "Franky shits in the
> studio" bit. That's awesome dog training right
> there.

Any time Mike eats on-mic. It will fascinate you!

exffx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The bar failure is just a bit. Why do you think
> Rob keeps playing the, "If you have a failing
> restaurant..." clip? It was a really successful
> neighborhood bar. O'Meara sold it because 5 years
> later he was planning to move to FL.
>
> Hank's Lookaround Cafe Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I can understand why Mike is sad about the
> > bar...the bar Don told him not to buy because
> it
> > would be a money pit. The bar with all the
> > ridiculous ABC violations like running Happy
> Hour
> > at all hours of the night and giving away free
> > booze to Mike's friends. The bar that stiffed
> its
> > employees. The bar Mike expected to throw off
> > enough profit to pay off Mike's underwater 1903
> > Vic.
> >
> > Obviously Mike didn't get a degree in business,
> or
> > common sense, from AU.

Agreed. It corresponded with his daughters graduation and the fact they are older now.

Just my 2 cents.

Answer to Bill Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As already mentioned Steve Dahl ' Tom Leykis '
> Marc Maron
>
> It has/ is being done. Just superior talent with
> dedicated fan bases.
> Yes, Don makes the cut there.

Disagree. Outside of 2 or 3 markets Don or Mike were not known. In fact I grew up in Richmond and never heard of them until I moved to NOVA in the late 90's. Howard Stern/ O&A are well known. Don't get it twisted thinking Don or Mike are that well known. Get out of your DC or Sacramento bubble.

Just my 2 cents.

During the little people discussion today Mike had to stop Rob at least twice, so there was definitely a conversation about it at some point. Maybe Kappy doesn't like it.

Favorite comedy of today's show:
Almost every commercial, Mike had to stop and reset because he started into the "funny" part, and they can't do those bits anymore.

I wish we knew who was forcing these changes, then we could just e-mail them all the good suggestions from here.

I do think they listen or read the board. Oscar has been interacting more with Mike. Mike is telling Robb to shut up more. I just wish Robb would just stop the constant laughing.

Also, he makes VCU sound like a bad school. VCU Medical Center is one of the best hospitals in the country.

Just my 2 cents.

TMOS Stats Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A message to David M and anyone else coming here
> from the Facebook TMOS Fan Club:
>
> Not everyone here is awful. But some of them are.
> I don't come here to talk nasty about Mike's kids.
> I don't like the posts here that cross the line
> into inappropriate. Many of the people here are
> current or former fans of the show who believe
> that Mike (and Robb) have destroyed their own
> show. They have hurt the show through both
> inaction and poor decisions. Many of us want the
> show to be great. Many of us think it could be
> great. That's part of why it is so upsetting to
> see what it has become. I stopped listening, but I
> still come here to discuss/follow what's
> happening.
>
> Let me ask some questions:
>
> 1. Why is the fan club so afraid of criticism?
>
> 2. Do you really think the show is as good as it
> could be?
>
> 3. The show has not grown since its inception.
> There is PROOF of this. If you have less listeners
> than when you started, isn't that a failure?
> Shouldn't you change the formula?
>
> 4. The TMOS Bonus shows cost $75.00 per year for
> up to 65 hours of content. This comes to $1.15 per
> hour. Don's show costs $85.00 per year for up to
> 480 hours of content. (Don has stated he will take
> 4 weeks vacation.) This comes to $0.18 per hour.
> Why is it so hard for the TMOS Fan Club to believe
> that people would pay for this? Many of you
> already pay almost that much and get much less for
> your money. It's only $10 more for almost 8 times
> the content!

Hey, TMOS Stats. I've actually been a lurker here since the thread kicked off, but I just never made an account until I wound up being posted by proxy anyway with the Fan Club screenshots. Figured I might as well be live. I'm with you, start to finish, on your whole first paragraph.

1. It stems from a place of insecurity and a need to belong. Because of the accessibility and presence of Mike, Robb, and Oscar, and the value many people place on their recognition and affirmation, the cast's pleasure forms a baseline culture. Offending the cast can easily result in a literal form of excommunication, so it's important not only to be inoffensive oneself but also to be seen policing those who do or might offend. There is a very low threshold with the cast above which any criticism, even constructive, is deemed offensive, so there is great pressure toward "positivity" at the expense of objectivity, among certain fans.

We're all like that to some extent. As an extreme, even learning to control a system from within means being forced to adapt to its "tools." I've met the cast on a few occasions and I liked hanging out with them, I generally enjoy the show, and I do value even the the casual "chumminess" we have online. Because I understand their value system and it is "their" arena, I take care to respect it in the Fan Club. Except in quite rare circumstances, I don't post criticism there, because it would not be well received. On the other hand, I won't make positive statements I don't believe in, either, and when other people do make constructive criticism, I stand up for them against the automatons who aren't able to control their fear of rejection. By doing that, I help to elevate that baseline of accessible discourse.

As an example, I wouldn't just volunteer the majority of this post in the Fan Club but I have said very similar things candidly. One Fan Club member asked point blank why the TMOS FFU thread even existed, and I told her. No one blocked or unfriended me. We all know the guys read this forum too, but that doesn't change A) what I perceive the truth to be, B) that this is a separate venue with a different culture, and it is not theirs, and C) I try not to say anything I'd be ashamed of, even if I'm not always successful.

2. Definitely not. I completely agree with most of the constructive criticism I've seen here for improving it.

3. I think we had a very stark example of that from one of your spiritual brethren a couple months ago who made the chart showing downloads over time, and comparing it to particular show elements. I would say it indicates a failing, yes, but it will only be ultimate failure if it isn't learned from and corrected. Maybe that point will be defined by the dissolution of the podcast, which I hope doesn't happen.

4. I really can't help you there. I'm the kind of guy who calculates $/oz. of beer at the bar and buys whichever size is most efficient. I think it's a phenomenal value compared to what I've already been willing to pay for other shows. Even if you imagine that Don's providing the same five hours of free content TMOS is, your premium subscription nets you five hours of bonus content per week, opposed to one. However, here's my actual answer: I think a lot of people are offended or have a wounded sense of entitlement because they aren't getting something they took for granted, and even $0.18/hour is infinitely more than the zero they expected.

David M Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TMOS Stats Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > A message to David M and anyone else coming
> here
> > from the Facebook TMOS Fan Club:
> >
> > Not everyone here is awful. But some of them
> are.
> > I don't come here to talk nasty about Mike's
> kids.
> > I don't like the posts here that cross the line
> > into inappropriate. Many of the people here are
> > current or former fans of the show who believe
> > that Mike (and Robb) have destroyed their own
> > show. They have hurt the show through both
> > inaction and poor decisions. Many of us want
> the
> > show to be great. Many of us think it could be
> > great. That's part of why it is so upsetting to
> > see what it has become. I stopped listening, but
> I
> > still come here to discuss/follow what's
> > happening.
> >
> > Let me ask some questions:
> >
> > 1. Why is the fan club so afraid of criticism?
> >
> > 2. Do you really think the show is as good as
> it
> > could be?
> >
> > 3. The show has not grown since its inception.
> > There is PROOF of this. If you have less
> listeners
> > than when you started, isn't that a failure?
> > Shouldn't you change the formula?
> >
> > 4. The TMOS Bonus shows cost $75.00 per year
> for
> > up to 65 hours of content. This comes to $1.15
> per
> > hour. Don's show costs $85.00 per year for up
> to
> > 480 hours of content. (Don has stated he will
> take
> > 4 weeks vacation.) This comes to $0.18 per
> hour.
> > Why is it so hard for the TMOS Fan Club to
> believe
> > that people would pay for this? Many of you
> > already pay almost that much and get much less
> for
> > your money. It's only $10 more for almost 8
> times
> > the content!
>
> Hey, TMOS Stats. I've actually been a lurker here
> since the thread kicked off, but I just never made
> an account until I wound up being posted by proxy
> anyway with the Fan Club screenshots. Figured I
> might as well be live. I'm with you, start to
> finish, on your whole first paragraph.
>
> 1. It stems from a place of insecurity and a need
> to belong. Because of the accessibility and
> presence of Mike, Robb, and Oscar, and the value
> many people place on their recognition and
> affirmation, the cast's pleasure forms a baseline
> culture. Offending the cast can easily result in a
> literal form of excommunication, so it's important
> not only to be inoffensive oneself but also to be
> seen policing those who do or might offend. There
> is a very low threshold with the cast above which
> any criticism, even constructive, is deemed
> offensive, so there is great pressure toward
> "positivity" at the expense of objectivity, among
> certain fans.
>
> We're all like that to some extent. As an extreme,
> even learning to control a system from within
> means being forced to adapt to its "tools." I've
> met the cast on a few occasions and I liked
> hanging out with them, I generally enjoy the show,
> and I do value even the the casual "chumminess" we
> have online. Because I understand their value
> system and it is "their" arena, I take care to
> respect it in the Fan Club. Except in quite rare
> circumstances, I don't post criticism there,
> because it would not be well received. On the
> other hand, I won't make positive statements I
> don't believe in, either, and when other people do
> make constructive criticism, I stand up for them
> against the automatons who aren't able to control
> their fear of rejection. By doing that, I help to
> elevate that baseline of accessible discourse.
>
> As an example, I wouldn't just volunteer the
> majority of this post in the Fan Club but I have
> said very similar things candidly. One Fan Club
> member asked point blank why the TMOS FFU thread
> even existed, and I told her. No one blocked or
> unfriended me. We all know the guys read this
> forum too, but that doesn't change A) what I
> perceive the truth to be, B) that this is a
> separate venue with a different culture, and it is
> not theirs, and C) I try not to say anything I'd
> be ashamed of, even if I'm not always successful.
>
> 2. Definitely not. I completely agree with most of
> the constructive criticism I've seen here for
> improving it.
>
> 3. I think we had a very stark example of that
> from one of your spiritual brethren a couple
> months ago who made the chart showing downloads
> over time, and comparing it to particular show
> elements. I would say it indicates a failing, yes,
> but it will only be ultimate failure if it isn't
> learned from and corrected. Maybe that point will
> be defined by the dissolution of the podcast,
> which I hope doesn't happen.
>
> 4. I really can't help you there. I'm the kind of
> guy who calculates $/oz. of beer at the bar and
> buys whichever size is most efficient. I think
> it's a phenomenal value compared to what I've
> already been willing to pay for other shows. Even
> if you imagine that Don's providing the same five
> hours of free content TMOS is, your premium
> subscription nets you five hours of bonus content
> per week, opposed to one. However, here's my
> actual answer: I think a lot of people are
> offended or have a wounded sense of entitlement
> because they aren't getting something they took
> for granted, and even $0.18/hour is infinitely
> more than the zero they expected.

We're pretty much on the same page. Thanks for taking the time to repsond. I would like to invite anyone else from the Fan Club to have a respectful, polite conversation about the positives and negatives of the show.

I listened to yesterday's podcast with the weather people. Again, as a person who wants to help these people - THAT IS NOT A GOOD INTERVIEW. Why would anyone be interested in these people? Please, think of that. Don't have guests. That is my advice. It's ok if you have Leonardo DiCaprio as your guest. That will fly. Outside of that, please stop.

Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Answer to Bill Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > As already mentioned Steve Dahl ' Tom Leykis '
> > Marc Maron
> >
> > It has/ is being done. Just superior talent
> with
> > dedicated fan bases.
> > Yes, Don makes the cut there.
>
> Disagree. Outside of 2 or 3 markets Don or Mike
> were not known. In fact I grew up in Richmond and
> never heard of them until I moved to NOVA in the
> late 90's. Howard Stern/ O&A are well known. Don't
> get it twisted thinking Don or Mike are that well
> known. Get out of your DC or Sacramento bubble.
>
> Just my 2 cents.

You can't be this dense. I hopped around a few southern states before I landed in Canada about 10 years ago. In every state I went to, D and M were syndicated and fairly well known. Not necessarily liked, but known. When I landed in Canada, I was amazed that they were even syndicated there in a few provinces and people knew them. You telling someone to get out of their bubble is hypocrisy to the highest degree. They obviously weren't stern or o and a, but to say they weren't known outside of DC and Sacramento is idiotic. Just because YOU hadn't heard of them while living in Richmond doesn't mean everyone hadn't. So again, get out of your fucking bubble of ignorance. Jesus.

Thanks to David M for actually having the decency and BALLS to engage in a conversation here.

LOLscar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Answer to Bill Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > As already mentioned Steve Dahl ' Tom Leykis
> '
> > > Marc Maron
> > >
> > > It has/ is being done. Just superior talent
> > with
> > > dedicated fan bases.
> > > Yes, Don makes the cut there.
> >
> > Disagree. Outside of 2 or 3 markets Don or Mike
> > were not known. In fact I grew up in Richmond
> and
> > never heard of them until I moved to NOVA in
> the
> > late 90's. Howard Stern/ O&A are well known.
> Don't
> > get it twisted thinking Don or Mike are that
> well
> > known. Get out of your DC or Sacramento bubble.
>
> >
> > Just my 2 cents.
>
> You can't be this dense. I hopped around a few
> southern states before I landed in Canada about 10
> years ago. In every state I went to, D and M were
> syndicated and fairly well known. Not necessarily
> liked, but known. When I landed in Canada, I was
> amazed that they were even syndicated there in a
> few provinces and people knew them. You telling
> someone to get out of their bubble is hypocrisy to
> the highest degree. They obviously weren't stern
> or o and a, but to say they weren't known outside
> of DC and Sacramento is idiotic. Just because YOU
> hadn't heard of them while living in Richmond
> doesn't mean everyone hadn't. So again, get out of
> your fucking bubble of ignorance. Jesus.


If you look at my original post I said 2 or 3 (major) markets. They were not on here in Richmond. Howard was on briefly here, but that did not last long. I lived in Denver and they were not on there. Yes they were syndicated, but not in major markets other than DC. So, to think that people all around this country heard of them is delusional. Only people that were DC transplants or the 20-30 markets they were in would have heard of them.

Facts are facts. Think with your head not your heart, Skippy.

Just my 2 cents.

Oh I forgot, I guess Wichita and Iowa were huge. I would put the Sports Junkies as being more well known at this point than Don and Mike in their prime. Quite frankly a better show with longevity top to bottom as well. They have staying power in any format.

Just my 2 cents.

Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
-----------------------------------------------I
> would put the Sports Junkies as being more well
> known at this point than Don and Mike in their
> prime.

I wouldn't, but if true, that is very sad.

Another good "bit" today; LFF has to be taught how to bathe his 6+ month old son since has yet to do that, or take care of the kid for more than one hour.

Pork Chop Suitcase Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
> -----------------------------------------------I
> > would put the Sports Junkies as being more well
> > known at this point than Don and Mike in their
> > prime.
>
> I wouldn't, but if true, that is very sad.

Think about Don and Mike were around 23 years, Sports Junkies 18. Chances are high they will make it another 5. I did enjoy D&M, but the Junkies I can relate to more since I am 39. I still can still listen to them daily and they put out a better product than both Don and Mike combined. It was a great combo back in the day. Problem is Don and Mike can't evolve and the Junkies have. Maybe because they were never hack DJ's. Either way better product.

Just my 2 cents.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2014 09:54PM by Dons BlackBerry.

Four Hour Club Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another good "bit" today; LFF has to be taught how
> to bathe his 6+ month old son since has yet to do
> that, or take care of the kid for more than one
> hour.


Most guys don't. I have 3 sons and my wife always handled those duties. Plus it's a woman's job. LOL

Just my 2 cents.

Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Four Hour Club Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Another good "bit" today; LFF has to be taught
> how
> > to bathe his 6+ month old son since has yet to
> do
> > that, or take care of the kid for more than one
> > hour.
>
>
> Most guys don't. I have 3 sons and my wife always
> handled those duties. Plus it's a woman's job.
> LOL
>
> Just my 2 cents.

Now you are talking out of your ass. "Most guys don't"? How do you come by this information? TV sitcoms?

Pork Chop Suitcase Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Four Hour Club Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Another good "bit" today; LFF has to be
> taught
> > how
> > > to bathe his 6+ month old son since has yet
> to
> > do
> > > that, or take care of the kid for more than
> one
> > > hour.
> >
> >
> > Most guys don't. I have 3 sons and my wife
> always
> > handled those duties. Plus it's a woman's job.
> > LOL
> >
> > Just my 2 cents.
>
> Now you are talking out of your ass. "Most guys
> don't"? How do you come by this information? TV
> sitcoms?

Sarcasm my friend, hence the LOL. But seriously, that's why you get married, right?

Just my 2 cents.

Dons BlackBerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh I forgot, I guess Wichita and Iowa were huge. I
> would put the Sports Junkies as being more well
> known at this point than Don and Mike in their
> prime. Quite frankly a better show with longevity
> top to bottom as well. They have staying power in
> any format.
>
> Just my 2 cents.


Are you fucking kidding me? The Junkies? A better show? Mike ranting in a shit stained studio is better than their "hurting" asses...Cakes an d EB are bearable, but I would rather listen to MandL than listen to JP or Lurch...