[mythtv-users] Data Direct "service"

Yeechang Lee ylee at pobox.com
Wed Apr 4 14:33:55 UTC 2007


Bruce Markey <bjm at lvcm.com> says:
> > The uninformed user was just that, uninformed and not affiliated
> > with
> 
> And I responded with a factual correction. Partially because
> your replay was at least mis-leading if not downright wrong.

This isn't true, as I'll address later. Bruce, by the way, I agreed
with you from the start in that the forum poster we both responded was
mistaken.

> F-abuser is currently the king of attempts at acts of intimidation
> to try to have things his way and has posted that he believes that
> he is effective.

The irony is that I can't see much of a difference between f-myth's
methods (as I've seen over the past few weeks and months over on
mythtv-dev) and yours, except that your approach is more overt. To
wit:

> > *Tribune Media Services isn't obligated to do anything*. The
> > company is doing us a huge favor, and
> 
> This is absolutely false and this attitude that we have to be
> beholden and obedient to then else they will take our toys away is
> BS.

[...]

> You may choose the bend over and ask for another. I will not.

Oh, come now. Is that sort of language really necessary? Don't you see
that that's *exactly* the attitude that got you banned at the forum in
the first place? We are dealing with television programming data, not
breathable air or clean water (as much as sometimes the ol' boob tube
may seem as necessary to us). As I wrote in another message to
mythtv-users:

    Even now, it's not like the data feed has completely died; it's
    just been somewhat (not completely; a lot of my TV shows still
    carry complete episode description data) degraded.

It still covers two weeks, it still carries accurate times and TV show
titles, and it's still superior to anything our non-North American
friends have access to.

Now, getting back to my reply at the Zap2It forum, the one which you
took such objection to:
>     MythTV assumes--and I think rightly so--that a generic episode
>     for a TV show that has a recording rule is one that could be one
>     the viewer wants to watch. This behavior can be overridden, if
>     desired, but better safe than sorry; better that an episode of
>     that big new TV show be recorded without a description than not
>     be recorded at all.

I still can't see anything wrong with what I wrote at the Zap2It
forum. All the TV shows whose episode-specific data is temporarily
missing are being recorded by their rules because the scheduler can't
tell whether the episodes are ones I've seen before or not. I don't
use any conditions like "New episodes only."

Now, back to Bruce:
> "Overridden" implies the override feature which would be entirely
> the wrong solution thought I assume you meant 'it cold be configured
> differently'.

The Zap2It forum is the wrong place to try to discuss in detail with a
non-MythTV user MythTV's specific use of the word "Override." I still
can't believe you're getting outraged at me for something like
this. (Actually, I can; this helps me better understand the mindset
that led you to post that original forum message that led to your
banning. Note that no one else, as far as I know, has seen your actual
message; just your recap. We really don't know just how antagonistic
you got. But I'm starting to get an idea.)

> You completely missed that the record status was "Repeat" rather
> than Will Record or Previously Recorded Earlier, Later or anything
> else. This status is the result of "Record new episodes only". Had
> this not been set, it would try to record all generic episodes.

I can't even parse the above sentences!

In any case, this is all ephemeral. Again, quoting from my earlier
message here:

    At some point--which I expect will occur sooner rather than
    later--the feed will be fixed and all will be well with the world
    again. Until then, I think I'll survive somehow.

-- 
Yeechang Lee <ylee at pobox.com> | +1 650 776 7763 | San Francisco CA US


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list