[mythtv-users] tv guide line-up free

Jay R. Ashworth jra at baylink.com
Thu Sep 6 12:52:40 UTC 2007

On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 09:23:11PM -0700, Robert Current wrote:
> > No accusations here, but I think this entire thing is missing the context
> > that started this.  And since *I* started this sequence that you are now
> > quoting, the piece missing is the context that these limitations would be
> > present if you *ONLY* had something similar to the TitanTV remote scheduling
> > service like the one currently implemented in GBPVR.
> >
> > Sure, once you take it out of that context, then make some other assumptions
> > that the only possible source of data is Schedules Direct, all sorts of
> > invalid conclusions can be drawn.  I even clarified this separation between
> > the remote scheduling service of TitanTV and using TitanTV as an XML
> > listings source in a later post, which seems to have gone ignored.
> I'm not accusing you David.  I'm just saying that was the FULL context
> of the message.  If you look at my reply to it, it was to clarify the
> context, and show that the remote scheduling from TitanTV's website
> couldn't possibly decrease functionality of MythTV.

Except that, *right there in that quote*, David makes a liar out of you.

>                                                        And that
> Schedules Direct was a data service, recurring recording happened in
> MythTV, nothing to do with Schedules Direct.
> But someone that would have happened to read that ONE message would
> have not understood it in context.  The noise level on the topic was
> so high, that I doubt many (if any) people read all o the posts.  So,
> if that one post was read, it's likely read out of context.
> David, your not saying anything untrue intentionally. 

Naw, David; you're lying *accidentally*.  ;-)

>                                                         I'm just
> disturbed by how quickly and easily the topic turns to Schedules
> Direct.  Then the noise level goes through the roof.  Then most of the
> people who seem to be "users" would likely see it is "why are people
> attacking these good guys."
> None of that is the case.  It seems quite the opposite to me?  When
> data sources come up, Schedules Direct gets defended by people before
> anyone accused it of anything, sometimes before it's Schedules Direct
> is even mentioned.  And I'm left asking "why are people attacking any
> ideas that might lead to alternatives to Schedules Direct?"

Because every suggestion you've made so far involved ripping off people
whose terms of service said "Don't do this"?  And we don't want to earn
MythTV a black eye with, um, oh, *the very data provider who are
supplying legally licensed data for Myth right now*?

Address this point, or just shut the hell up, ok?

> Honestly, I've given up on data source.  They won't let the
> conversation happen.

*One* board member from SD has piped in here: DK said, as I recall, "we
don't care".

So please stop accusing them of even *speaking*, will you?

-- jra
Jay R. Ashworth                   Baylink                      jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com                     '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://photo.imageinc.us             +1 727 647 1274

More information about the mythtv-users mailing list