Navy ad Bad.

[quote name='Justme8800']
As far as the Navy being an A-list advertiser, I completely agree. But if there was one thing that could be changed in all of this, it's that I hope the CAGcast can find a different, and hopefully more relevant, A-list advertiser. Maybe some big game publisher, or an electronics retailer.
[/quote] Trust me, I'd love to be in a situtation where I could pick and choose!
 
You say your problem is with the military in your first post Justme, Maybe it is JUST YOU. Where do you think military recruiters come from? If you don't listen to the show move on, I don't go talking about what tv shows should change so I would watch them again, I move on with my life.
 
My podcast has no advertisements at all :lol:

:booty:

And to the OP, if you don't like that aspect of the show, skip over it, or don't listen at all. Problem solved.
 
Seriously, you guys actually hear the ads? I just automatically tune out advertisements I hear, be it on podcasts, television, radio, etc...
 
For the next person who creates a thread about the Navy ads Cheapy should rename them " Navy" and have their custom title " Accelarate Your Life".
 
This doesn't bother me at all, in fact I like how Cheapy is donating the money he gets to charity, that is a class act thing to do.
 
I think the OP summed it up himself: "I started taking the podcast for granted". You know, free entertainment sure is nice, isn't it?

Plus, it probably took you as long to write your angsty soliloquy as it would have taken to listen to two or three episodes' worth of ads.

And as I said in another thread, as someone old enough to remember life before podcasts, tivo, and bittorrent -- a time when we watched TV on the (wait for it) TV and radio on the radio... with a constant stream of ads supporting that FREE ENTERTAINMENT... let me just offer to call the WAAAAAHHHBulence, you overdramatic whiner.
 
[quote name='CheapyD']Trust me, I'd love to be in a situtation where I could pick and choose![/quote]

That's not the case? That wasn't the impression I got from CAGcast 95, my bad. Something about you not even needing the money, I must have misunderstood. Sorry 'bout that.



[quote name='catapult37']I think the OP summed it up himself: "I started taking the podcast for granted". You know, free entertainment sure is nice, isn't it?

Plus, it probably took you as long to write your angsty soliloquy as it would have taken to listen to two or three episodes' worth of ads.

And as I said in another thread, as someone old enough to remember life before podcasts, tivo, and bittorrent -- a time when we watched TV on the (wait for it) TV and radio on the radio... with a constant stream of ads supporting that FREE ENTERTAINMENT... let me just offer to call the WAAAAAHHHBulence, you overdramatic whiner.[/quote]

If I was paying for the CAGcast, I'd be pissed about this fiasco. As it is, I'm just disappointed. It's not my place to tell Cheapy and Wombat what they can and can't do. But, as a member of the CAG community, am I not at least entitled to an opinion? And is it wrong to try and share that opinion in the most eloquent way I can?

Let me say this AGAIN; I do not have a problem with advertisements in nature. I do not have a problem with CAG Foreplay recommending GoDaddy every show. I would not have a problem with it if they spent two minutes an episode on ads. My problem is with:

1. Cheapy's bogus rationale for doing the ads in the first place. "Industry cred?" The first time some development studio goes "Oh, CAGcast? Aren't they the guys who have A-list advertisers? Give 'em the scoop!" I'll eat every word I've typed about this. "I don't even want the money" was insulting, and it makes me feel that the ads had little benefit to the CAGcast for the listeners it lost. Not to mention, I was under the impression I was supporting CAG already by shopping through links on the site. As for the charity, CAG would do a lot better to do what they did last year, have everyone donate ten bucks in CAG's name. This year, they're gonna get a lot more of "well, I've already listened to the ads, and that money is going to Child's Play, so I've done my part."

2. Military recruiters. Stop reading now if you don't agree with this, because reason 1 is the main issue, and this is just icing of the proverbial cake. There are many people in the country who would A) sign up regardless of being told to, to serve their country, and there are many more people who would B) sign up in the event of the military actually needing more personnel resources, like in WWII, to serve their country. ATM our esteemed commander in chief is grinding resource A into the ground in Iraq, and if he is to continue his crusade in Iran as planned, he needs to draw off resource B. Problem is, he needs to convince resource B that his oil crusade is worth their lives they may lose. This unfortunate task falls on the recruiters, who channel this insanity into the next starry-eyed, patriotic 17y/o gullible enough to believe he'd be fighting for his homeland.

Point 2 is all but moot, as I realize nobody cares about it, except for the majority of the world population. Point 1 is actually relevant, and is the principle I can't manage to ditch in order to listen to the excellent CAGcast. CAG does not have anything in the way of "industry cred" to gain from turning the podcast into a sellout whore. CAG already gets many scoops from insiders, moreso than the average commercial show under embargo to not say anything until the whole gaming world already knows about it.

Also, I am not an "overdramatic whiner" in need of a "wahmbulance." I am someone with an apparently unpopular point of view. Just because you lack the insight to see from someone else's point of view, despite the fact that I am willing to spend so much effort explaining it to you, does not make it appropriate for you to insult me like that. You have a different opinion then I do, yet I am not calling you anything worse than a peremptory philistine.

Now can we please cool it with the disparaging comments, and can someone please explain why they think I am looking at this the wrong way? I am not trying to troll here, I honestly want to understand why the CAG community is, by and large, taking this lying down. Thank you.

~Justme8800

P.S. Yes, I am aware that I need a new pseudonym. Thank you for pointing that out.
 
You know, I got carried away. I apologize for the name-calling and general tone of my message, which was uncalled for. I disagree with you, but that's no reason to get all flamey. And I will agree with you on one point: Cheapy's rationale for the ads comes off sounding a little strange. It's nice that his cut will go to benefit charity, but I don't get the impression that that was the driving reason behind the decision. The "industry cred" argument is a bit odd.
 
[quote name='Justme8800']That's not the case? That wasn't the impression I got from CAGcast 95, my bad. Something about you not even needing the money, I must have misunderstood. Sorry 'bout that.

If I was paying for the CAGcast, I'd be pissed about this fiasco. As it is, I'm just disappointed. It's not my place to tell Cheapy and Wombat what they can and can't do. But, as a member of the CAG community, am I not at least entitled to an opinion? And is it wrong to try and share that opinion in the most eloquent way I can?

Let me say this AGAIN; I do not have a problem with advertisements in nature. I do not have a problem with CAG Foreplay recommending GoDaddy every show. I would not have a problem with it if they spent two minutes an episode on ads. My problem is with:

1. Cheapy's bogus rationale for doing the ads in the first place. "Industry cred?" The first time some development studio goes "Oh, CAGcast? Aren't they the guys who have A-list advertisers? Give 'em the scoop!" I'll eat every word I've typed about this. "I don't even want the money" was insulting, and it makes me feel that the ads had little benefit to the CAGcast for the listeners it lost. Not to mention, I was under the impression I was supporting CAG already by shopping through links on the site. As for the charity, CAG would do a lot better to do what they did last year, have everyone donate ten bucks in CAG's name. This year, they're gonna get a lot more of "well, I've already listened to the ads, and that money is going to Child's Play, so I've done my part."

2. Military recruiters. Stop reading now if you don't agree with this, because reason 1 is the main issue, and this is just icing of the proverbial cake. There are many people in the country who would A) sign up regardless of being told to, to serve their country, and there are many more people who would B) sign up in the event of the military actually needing more personnel resources, like in WWII, to serve their country. ATM our esteemed commander in chief is grinding resource A into the ground in Iraq, and if he is to continue his crusade in Iran as planned, he needs to draw off resource B. Problem is, he needs to convince resource B that his oil crusade is worth their lives they may lose. This unfortunate task falls on the recruiters, who channel this insanity into the next starry-eyed, patriotic 17y/o gullible enough to believe he'd be fighting for his homeland.

Point 2 is all but moot, as I realize nobody cares about it, except for the majority of the world population. Point 1 is actually relevant, and is the principle I can't manage to ditch in order to listen to the excellent CAGcast. CAG does not have anything in the way of "industry cred" to gain from turning the podcast into a sellout whore. CAG already gets many scoops from insiders, moreso than the average commercial show under embargo to not say anything until the whole gaming world already knows about it.

Also, I am not an "overdramatic whiner" in need of a "wahmbulance." I am someone with an apparently unpopular point of view. Just because you lack the insight to see from someone else's point of view, despite the fact that I am willing to spend so much effort explaining it to you, does not make it appropriate for you to insult me like that. You have a different opinion then I do, yet I am not calling you anything worse than a peremptory philistine.

Now can we please cool it with the disparaging comments, and can someone please explain why they think I am looking at this the wrong way? I am not trying to troll here, I honestly want to understand why the CAG community is, by and large, taking this lying down. Thank you.

~Justme8800

P.S. Yes, I am aware that I need a new pseudonym. Thank you for pointing that out.[/quote]
are you for serious? think about what you're saying -

i don't know how to put this in plainer english so bear with me, savior of the oppressed advertiser haters -

CheapyD is trying to create a business - starting from scratch (the website) branching out to other levels (cagcast) - his business decisions are his own and he's been more than willing to listen to Cag feedback - but you can't knock him for accepting a grade-A (and if you can't figure out that the NAVY has big bucks and influence, especially on the 18-25 male bracket, you are retarded) advertiser unless you wanna go ahead and lay down some cash (which, by the way, you haven't because you get the cagcast, cag.com, videogame news and deals updates, community, forum support etc. FOR FREE).

what does Child's Play have to do with your topic?
furthermore, what does the war in iraq (or whevever) have to do with the CAGcast?
Who cares what Cheapy does with his money? I think he did that in part to show that he's not trying to betray our loyalty (which he shouldn't because i fully support him making money).

Small companies start with small advertisement - in this case it's a big break - but normally he would be sponsored by shitty ass companies (like madcat). Give the CAGcast 1-2 years and then see who's dope he's pushing.

Are you actually one of those people that think that people in Pepsi commercials only drink Pepsi?

i can think for myself, i don't need your World Affairs 101 bullshit up in my CAGcast, that shit is for the Lifestyle forum.
 
I've been a long time listener to the cast since about show 40... It’s been entertaining and definitely something I look forward to listen to during my commute to work... with that being said, I was of the same opinion JustMe when I first heard the ads.

I felt they were hokey and out of place, unlike the 1up show's video podcast that uses real video game related sponsorships. (at last notice, I stopped watching it months ago)

But then my other weekly podcasts started doing stranger things than having small 30 second ads. Things like posting a cast on its website rather than being able to be downloaded conveniently via iTunes. Things like begging for donations at the beginning of there casts. That’s why I decided to create a screenname and leave a post.

Cheapy, keep the ads… hopefully you get some videogame related sponsorships.

You and wombat do an awesome job of giving a different point of view rather than the usual nerdy fandom that other video game podcasts are littered with. (destructoid, 1up) Just two regular dudes who talk up video games. Keep up the excellent work.:applause:
 
Hear, hear, DirtyDuck. It could certainly be a lot worse! Just because all the "cool" podcasts are doing something, it doesn't mean that they have to. As long as Cheapy and Wombat keep that in mind, and don't succumb to podcast peer pressure, I'm happy with whatever ads they want to run. I'm only boycotting the show until the navy ads are over, because frankly Cheapy sounded like a teenager whose friends convinced him to start shooting up. If he could just attest that he's not doing it for the "image," than most of my cause is justified, certainly enough to shut me up.


To answer Sleepkyng's questions, I thought I laid it out when I brought them up. Child's play is the charity that Cheapy said he'd donate the money he "doesn't need" to, and that CAG had a hugely successful fundraiser for last year.

The war in Iraq, I agree, shouldn't have any place in the CAGcast (or it's forums). So that's why I think the Navy, and by extension the war they are fighting, shouldn't be in the CAGcast.

What did I say that brought up your pepsi analogy? Do I come across as stupid or retarted to you? Just because I don't agree with your groupthink doesn't indicate my intellegence, and I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

As for Cheapy's business, what about it? He is smart, and he knows to listen to his listeners. If he pisses them off so they stop listening, that's not getting him any closer to bigger advertisers. That's how any television or radio show works. If I don't tell them why I've stopped listening and their number has gone down by one, what's the point of not listening? Self-gratitude? I may not be a very loud voice, and I may not make a big difference, but I owe it to the CAGcast to throw my pebble against the wall.

~Justme8800
 
I'm just itching to respond here, but I'm going to hold my tongue... this isn't the place for politics - that's for the Lifestyle forum and that's why I avoid that forum...

But I did want to say that I support Cheapy's decision... the ads are short and unobtrusive, IMO. Also wanted to say that there is myself and likely some others who would stop listening if Cheapy *denied* the Navy ad's simply because they were military related...

And thank you to all our military CAGs! :)
 
Okay, now for my opinion that no one asked for. Personally, I don't much like the fact that they are Navy ads, but that's also why I fast forward whenever they start. Now, personally I was hoping that instead of 60 seconds of Navy ads in the show, we instead has 30, 2 second ads for Sun Chips. How awesome would that be?

Cheapy: Wombat, Guitar Hero 3 is out.
Wombat: Eat sun chips.
Cheapy: Have you picked yours up yet?
Wombat: Yes, I have. Eat sun chips.

Huh, huh? I want a Sun Chips advertisment damn it.

P. S. - As much as I don't like the idea of them being sponsored by the US government. Look at it like I do. CheapyD has only lost money from me, because I got a CAG bracelet for me, a fellow cag and my gf without even paying the extra postage of 51 cents for the three combined. So, if Cheapy and Wombat get $80 something odd dollars a piece per show for me having to listen to a couple of Navy ads, then I can fast foward a few seconds for them to make a buck.
 
Well I dont know about you guys but Im joining ASAP!

Everybody needs to relax, its 1:30 of the whole show and its not like the "real" radio where you cant fast foward.
 
[quote name='Justme8800']The war in Iraq, I agree, shouldn't have any place in the CAGcast (or it's forums). So that's why I think the Navy, and by extension the war they are fighting, shouldn't be in the CAGcast.
[/QUOTE]

I think you just told us the real, underlying reason why you are against the ads. There is nothing about the Iraq war in the Cagcast. You can be supportive of the US Navy and the men and women that serve, and still be against the war.
 
[quote name='msdmoney']I think you just told us the real, underlying reason why you are against the ads. There is nothing about the Iraq war in the Cagcast. You can be supportive of the US Navy and the men and women that serve, and still be against the war.[/quote]

Likewise, you can be supportive of the Navy and still be against their misleading recruiting campaigns. Anyone who's actually been in a naval battle can affirm that there come's a good deal of baggage with "seeing the world," "being a man," and getting that scholarship. Anyone who joins the Navy aware of this has my absolute and complete respect. Anyone who is convinced by their deceivingly glamorous spiel has that, but they also have my sympathy.

The real, underlying reason I am against the ads has nothing to do with the Navy, it has to do with Cheapy's baloney reasons for running the ads in the first place. If my problem was with the Iraq War, don't you think I would have actually mentioned it in my rants? What would be the point of trying to boycott something while not explaining why?
 
I have an Idea cheapyD. There is a better way to skip the ads. Since you are using an iMac now you can do this. Enhanced podcasts. What you can do is set chapters in the podcast which will make it much easier for users to skip the ads. Kinda like going to "the next track" on a cd or ipod but still being in the same file. Check it out here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_podcast. Only hting you will have to do is put apicture corresponding to the chapter but that's all.
 
Enhanced podcasts are itunes/ ipod only. While awesome, you would have to have an MP3 feed or cut out a large percentage of your audience
 
[quote name='usickenme']Enhanced podcasts are itunes/ ipod only. While awesome, you would have to have an MP3 feed or cut out a large percentage of your audience[/quote]
It Is in quicktime as well. I still think it's a good idea.
 
Great idea and all, guys, but that's sort of solving the wrong problem... besides, I doubt any advertiser would go for that, much less the Navy.

As for "bitching," what? Do you think Cheapy would rather I just stopped listening and didn't explain why? Or would it be better to rectify a show-stopping problem that can be trivially fixed?

Maybe you have some scrupulous issues with dogfighting. If the CAGcast took on some advertising from a dogfighting scout, would you just sit there and listen to it like a good little consumer? No, you'd take issue with it. I'm not saying the Navy are like dogfighters, but maybe you've gotten my point.

~Justme8800
 
Wombat seems to be more prepared and eager to do the show each week now that he's getting a little $$$. Plus Cheapy is donating his cut to charity. If anything its enhanced the program and the image of CAG.
 
[quote name='Justme8800']Great idea and all, guys, but that's sort of solving the wrong problem... besides, I doubt any advertiser would go for that, much less the Navy.

As for "bitching," what? Do you think Cheapy would rather I just stopped listening and didn't explain why? Or would it be better to rectify a show-stopping problem that can be trivially fixed?

Maybe you have some scrupulous issues with dogfighting. If the CAGcast took on some advertising from a dogfighting scout, would you just sit there and listen to it like a good little consumer? No, you'd take issue with it. I'm not saying the Navy are like dogfighters, but maybe you've gotten my point.

~Justme8800[/quote]

The only point you keep making, is that you are a dumbass. It seems the majority don't mind the ads, they either fast forward through them or just mentally block them out. Oh, wait, there might be that large percentage that go out and enlist in the Navy... :roll:
 
[quote name='Kosh']The only point you keep making, is that you are a dumbass. It seems the majority don't mind the ads, they either fast forward through them or just mentally block them out. Oh, wait, there might be that large percentage that go out and enlist in the Navy... :roll:[/quote]

Good lord, how many bleedin' times do I have to say it? It's the principle of the thing! Not annoyance, not worry that a few CAGs on the fence are going to sign up, no, those are fine!

I CANNOT simply "fast-forward" past the fact that Cheapy is trying to pass the CAGcast as any other two-bit streetwalker of a podcast. I CANNOT "fast-forward" past him saying "I don't even need the money," because I've already heard him say it. I cannot "fast-forward" past my moral conscience like it's worth less than a podcast, no matter how entertaining it is. I'm thrilled for you that you can do it, but fast-forwarding does not solve any problems.

And even if you could find a dictionary with the definition for "dumbass" in it, I don't think you would find that it says "a person who disagrees with the majority." Just because I think you are an ignorant and heartless troll doesn't give me an excuse to call you names. What have I said, out of four pages of explaining, that wasn't well supported and logical? What did I say that led you to believe I am someone of comparable intellegence to a retarded donkey? One day you will learn that there are people who think differently than you do in this world, and that many of them are actually wiser than you are.

~Justme8800

P.S. Sorry to anyone who had to sit through that. I know that in any argument, resorting to name calling is a concession of defeat, but it still sets me off like nothing else.
 
[quote name='Justme8800']
As for "bitching," what? Do you think Cheapy would rather I just stopped listening and didn't explain why? Or would it be better to rectify a show-stopping problem that can be trivially fixed?

Maybe you have some scrupulous issues with dogfighting. If the CAGcast took on some advertising from a dogfighting scout, would you just sit there and listen to it like a good little consumer? No, you'd take issue with it. I'm not saying the Navy are like dogfighters, but maybe you've gotten my point.

~Justme8800[/QUOTE]

I don't stop watching my favorite TV shows because they have ads I don't like on them, and I don't walk out of theaters because they have ads before movies now, and I'm certainly not going to stop listening to the CAGCast because of a 30 second ad I can skip over.
 
[quote name='Justme8800']
And even if you could find a dictionary with the definition for "dumbass" in it, I don't think you would find that it says "a person who disagrees with the majority." [/quote]

You're right it doesn't. Nope, you're a dumbass for many various other reasons. Here are a couple pointed out by others in this thread.

[quote name='Sleepkyng']are you for serious? think about what you're saying -

i don't know how to put this in plainer english so bear with me, savior of the oppressed advertiser haters -

CheapyD is trying to create a business - starting from scratch (the website) branching out to other levels (cagcast) - his business decisions are his own and he's been more than willing to listen to Cag feedback - but you can't knock him for accepting a grade-A (and if you can't figure out that the NAVY has big bucks and influence, especially on the 18-25 male bracket, you are retarded) advertiser unless you wanna go ahead and lay down some cash (which, by the way, you haven't because you get the cagcast, cag.com, videogame news and deals updates, community, forum support etc. FOR FREE).

what does Child's Play have to do with your topic?
furthermore, what does the war in iraq (or whevever) have to do with the CAGcast?
Who cares what Cheapy does with his money? I think he did that in part to show that he's not trying to betray our loyalty (which he shouldn't because i fully support him making money).

Small companies start with small advertisement - in this case it's a big break - but normally he would be sponsored by shitty ass companies (like madcat). Give the CAGcast 1-2 years and then see who's dope he's pushing.

Are you actually one of those people that think that people in Pepsi commercials only drink Pepsi?

i can think for myself, i don't need your World Affairs 101 bullshit up in my CAGcast, that shit is for the Lifestyle forum.[/quote]

[quote name='lordwow']I don't stop watching my favorite TV shows because they have ads I don't like on them, and I don't walk out of theaters because they have ads before movies now, and I'm certainly not going to stop listening to the CAGCast because of a 30 second ad I can skip over.[/quote]

Both of these people debunk your two points that you are trying to make located in this post. http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3577034&postcount=59
Being, 1. You don't accept Cheapy's reasoning for having the Navy ads, and 2. You don't like Military Recruiters.



That is why you are being a dumbass about this topic. You can say all you want about being an adult, but the reality is you're not being one yourself. You keep on and on about it, even though the majority doesn't care and seeing as we've heard Navy ads for the last three shows, Cheapy pretty much said, tough shit the ads are staying.

Do us all a favor, stop listening to the Cagcast, because obviously the 90 seconds of Navy ads is too much for you to handle. While you're at it delete your account on these forums, I'm pretty sure you won't be missed.
 
I've already explained what was wrong with the first post there that "debunked" my *opinion.* As for the second one, just because that guy lets show producers piss all over his humanity by endorsing evil advertisers, doesn't mean I should.

As for me being wrong because the "majority" disagrees with me, I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. Even if all the cattle are gladly being herded into the next pasture for their FREE grazing, I'm not stupid for seeing that it's one more pasture closer to the slaughterhouse. You guys go on ahead, but I'm going to stand my ground.

Doing you all a favor... Yes, as I've mentioned a couple times now, I am no longer listening to the CAGcast because of these ads. The last one I heard was #95, and I'm not listening to any more until Cheapy finds a better advertiser... heck, ANY other advertiser. And I'm sure no one would miss me if they never heard from me again... except for, y'know, just about everyone who listens to CAG Foreplay, since I'm sponsoring the next giveaway contest. I'm sure Ship wouldn't mind if I dropped out now. I'll make sure they all thank you personally for giving me such excellent advice.

~Justme8800

P.S. Seriously, dude, name calling is not necessary, and it's an extremely trollish thing to be doing. If you feel you can come up with a legitimate reason why I'm wrong, even given that no one has yet to do so, I invite you to talk about it rationally. Showing everyone that you're old enough to use "language" isn't proving anything beyond your inability to talk levelheadedly.
 
[quote name='Justme8800']As for the second one, just because that guy lets show producers piss all over his humanity by endorsing evil advertisers, doesn't mean I should. [/quote]

Maybe you're not a dumbass, but I do know you're bat shit crazy.

Why is the Navy considered an "evil" advertiser? Because you said so? You take the cake, dude, you take the cake. LOL!


[quote name='Justme8800']If you feel you can come up with a legitimate reason why I'm wrong, even given that no one has yet to do so, I invite you to talk about it rationally[/quote]
I'll give you a reason. It's really simple. It's Cheapy's show, he can choose any advertiser he damn well pleases. That's all any of us need to know, including you. It's not a Democracy, you don't get a choice. Cheapy is the Supreme Leader of the Cagcast and Wombat is his Evil Queen.


[quote name='Justme8800']And I'm sure no one would miss me if they never heard from me again... except for, y'know, just about everyone who listens to CAG Foreplay, since I'm sponsoring the next giveaway contest. I'm sure Ship wouldn't mind if I dropped out now. I'll make sure they all thank you personally for giving me such excellent advice. [/quote]

That's fine, don't sponsor it. I'll gladly take your place.

Shipwreck, if this guy backs out on supplying the prize for the next giveaway contest just drop me a PM. I'll gladly donate a prize, it would be my pleasure if it gets rid of this guy.
 
[quote name='Kosh']Why is the Navy considered an "evil" advertiser? Because you said so? You take the cake, dude, you take the cake. LOL![/quote]
LOL, ha ha, the cake is a lie and all that jazz. I consider active Navy recruitment bad, which is a synonym for "evil" in the context I was using. I'm not trying to speak for anyone else here, least of all you, but yes, I've explained my logic here several times over.

[quote name='Kosh']I'll give you a reason. It's really simple. It's Cheapy's show, he can choose any advertiser he damn well pleases. That's all any of us need to know, including you. It's not a Democracy, you don't get a choice. Cheapy is the Supreme Leader of the Cagcast and Wombat is his Evil Queen.[/quote]

Ah, yes, that is true. Which is why I've left the "kingdom of CAGcast," as it were for the time being. If a king is unjust to his people, they will leave. That's why kings try to make their kingdoms a good place to be. That's why Cheapy read and responded in this thread, because, as any good king, he cares about what people want.

At the moment, it seems he thinks that more of "his" people will benefit from the hypothetical deluge of exclusive insider opportunities he will get by selling out his show. I think the kingdom has nothing to gain by selling out the show, but for the check in his (and by extension, Child Play's) pocket. Even there, it's pretty clear to me that he will lose more in listener donations than he will gain from the Navy. Not to mention all this talk about getting more inside info by looking more commercial is hogwash, and you know it.

[quote name='Kosh']That's fine, don't sponsor it. I'll gladly take your place.

Shipwreck, if this guy backs out on supplying the prize for the next giveaway contest just drop me a PM. I'll gladly donate a prize, it would be my pleasure if it gets rid of this guy.[/quote]

I was being sarcastic when I said I would take advice from you. Why in the world would I go back on promising Ship a donation? I have absolutely nothing against CAG Foreplay, as what sponsorship they have is completely resonable and transparent for what it is. Though by all means, don't let that stop you from donating! Two contests are better than one.

~Justme8800

P.S. "Crazy" is fine, I can handle that. So were Che Guevara, George Washington, and Mahatma Gandhi. Heck, even you're a little loose, but don't take that as an insult. :)
 
You're worse than FoxNews. You're trying to spin this so much, you're stepping all over yourself.

Here's you're two main problems.

[quote name='Justme8800']
1. Cheapy's bogus rationale for doing the ads in the first place. "Industry cred?"

2. Military recruiters. Stop reading now if you don't agree with this, because reason 1 is the main issue, and this is just icing of the proverbial cake.
[/quote]

You say the main problem is the first. Which you then reinforce here.

[quote name='Justme8800']
The real, underlying reason I am against the ads has nothing to do with the Navy, it has to do with Cheapy's baloney reasons for running the ads in the first place. [/quote]

Then you say this.

[quote name='Justme8800']I'm only boycotting the show until the navy ads are over, because frankly Cheapy sounded like a teenager whose friends convinced him to start shooting up. If he could just attest that he's not doing it for the "image," than most of my cause is justified, certainly enough to shut me up.[/quote]
And this.

[quote name='Justme8800']The last one I heard was #95, and I'm not listening to any more until Cheapy finds a better advertiser... heck, ANY other advertiser. [/quote]

So, let's say the Navy ads end and he starts advertising McDonald's. Also, let's say it's for the same reason, they're a big "A" list advertiser and he wants the credibility of having that "A" list advertiser. That's okay with you? Because, remember, you said you're only boycotting the show while the Navy ads run.

Remember though, you did say this.

[quote name='Justme8800']
The real, underlying reason I am against the ads has nothing to do with the Navy, it has to do with Cheapy's baloney reasons for running the ads in the first place. [/quote]
The reasoning for the ads is still the same, whether it's the Navy or McDonald's. The show's credibility.

It has nothing to with the Navy, huh? Yet, as long as it's not the Navy you'll listen again. Nope, sorry you're full of it. It has everything to do with the Navy for you.


You also say this.


[quote name='Justme8800']
Let me say this AGAIN; I do not have a problem with advertisements in nature. I do not have a problem with CAG Foreplay recommending GoDaddy every show. [/quote]

Proving once again, that it's all about the ads being the Navy.


So what is it? I understand it can be both reasons, but if the advertiser changes, your reason #1 is still there. Yet, you said you'd start listening again. Just stop contradicting yourself and come clean. You're anti-military and that's the only reason you have a problem with the current running ads.
 
I have to admit, I am not a fan of the Army/Navy's new found respect for the recruiting pool that is "gamers". But I do have a lot of respect for the armed forces. The Army knows its demographics and in the past few years has ramped up the war games = games = adventure and respect.

That being said, I think the folks that run CAG have every right to put ads in the show. I think CAGs would just like the ads to reflect the spirit of the show and armed forces recruiting is not in that spirit for most people.
 
[quote name='Kosh']You're worse than FoxNews. You're trying to spin this so much, you're stepping all over yourself.[/quote]
Sigh. All I am trying to do is explain my position on this, and I'm getting hoarse repeating myself. You're right, that one line I said is due for a little clarification, as I could have phrased it better:

The main, underlying reason I am against the ads has nothing to do with the Navy, it has to do with Cheapy's baloney reasons for running the ads in the first place.

I was trying to emphasize that I have more of a problem with #1, as it were, than with #2. I still have both problems, but problem #1 is the primary thing I am against here.

So what is it? I understand it can be both reasons, but if the advertiser changes, your reason #1 is still there. Yet, you said you'd start listening again. Just stop contradicting yourself and come clean. You're anti-military and that's the only reason you have a problem with the current running ads.
Click to expand...
I have problems #1 and #2. The sum of both problems. Problem #1 by itself is an annoyance and an insult to the listeners, and problem #2 by itself is an annoyance and an insult to the listeners. I can put up with an annoyance and an insult, and neither problem on its own merits boycotting. Both of them at the same time, however, is just too much, and I refuse to be dragged that far.

If the ads were to change, (and I was thinking more along the lines of something relevant to the audience, like Toshiba or the like) I would consider my efforts worth it. In that case, not only would reason #2 be nullified, it would mean that Cheapy listened and did something about it, which would mean a lot to me (and more than counter for reason #1). Likewise, if Cheapy were to outright take back what he said on CAGcast #95 about the "cred" gibberish, thus nullifying problem #2, I would hop back on board for the same reasons.

By the way, being anti-war and anti-recruiting do NOT mean the same thing as anti-military, do not confuse them. I am not anti-military (that would be silly, it is essential for us to have National Defence), and what I object about concerning the Navy is not the whole story here. I am not contradicting myself, I am not trying to spin anything, I am only explaining what it is I'm doing, and why I'm doing it. I am not asking that you do it, I am not asking that you agree with me. All I ask from you is that you see my point of view, and to stop treating this as some sort of debate. Happy Thanksgiving!

~Justme8800
 
I dont see whats bad about the ads, give cheapy a break. he IS a father after all. one day, trolls on the forums will make him so mad, he'll chop his 360 in half. do you want that. do you!?!

my opinion: this thread is shoveled with crap. the navy is evil is it? HAHAHAHA!
 
[quote name='Justme8800']Even if all the cattle are gladly being herded into the next pasture for their FREE grazing, I'm not stupid for seeing that it's one more pasture closer to the slaughterhouse. You guys go on ahead, but I'm going to stand my ground.[/QUOTE]


I have a feeling people are disliking you not specifically for the difference in opinion, but for the kind of things you're posting similar to what I've quoted: a mix of being on a high horse, combined with a condenscending tone...and a dash of ego ("I would consider my efforts worth it").

It's easy to say that people are disliking you because of your opinions...all i can say from MY opinion is that even though I have zero stake in the conversation, I really can't stand the way you're carrying yourself in this conversation. You could be arguing for solving world hungry...and it would still come off annoying as hell if you used the same tact as you did in this thread.

More power to ya for sticking to your beliefs, but oy vey, next time find a better way to get your point across. It was a diasater since your opening post, and it only got worse from there. Best of luck for next time.
 
[quote name='greydt']I have a feeling people are disliking you not specifically for the difference in opinion, but for the kind of things you're posting similar to what I've quoted: a mix of being on a high horse, combined with a condenscending tone...and a dash of ego ("I would consider my efforts worth it").

It's easy to say that people are disliking you because of your opinions...all i can say from MY opinion is that even though I have zero stake in the conversation, I really can't stand the way you're carrying yourself in this conversation. You could be arguing for solving world hungry...and it would still come off annoying as hell if you used the same tact as you did in this thread.

More power to ya for sticking to your beliefs, but oy vey, next time find a better way to get your point across. It was a diasater since your opening post, and it only got worse from there. Best of luck for next time.[/quote]

You, sir, are absolutely correct. I've been thinking more and more that my shortcomings in dealing with people calling me names is my own worst enemy here. I try to apologize every time I catch myself flaming, it's just that I really can't stand people saying "I don't understand what you're talking about, therefore you must be stupid."

I hate to be giving people the wrong impression about my social nature, and in retrospect I can't blame them at all for doing so, judging by this thread. The initial post was written in a complete furor, as the whole issue came completely out of the blue. People read that, assumed my rage was aimed at them, and retaliated as expected. It's not my nature to take being insulted lightly, (which is probably why I brought this issue up in the first place) so I end up explaining my position over and over, with increasing exasperation. Everyone here has only seen my "pissed, activist" side, which is in all honesty not something I often express.

All the same, these are my shortcomings, and not those of the issues at hand. I would hope people can see past my evidently imperfect descriptions, and see the underlying problems. It's sometimes important to be able to see past the people jumping up and down screaming, and understand what they are so desperately trying to tell you. What I'm trying to get across is not about me, so don't let your opinion of me impact your views on the topic.

Again, I'm sorry, for giving such a poor impression. I have a problem with flamebait, especially when it's directed at me, and I would imagine I'm not the only one like that. I think if you were to find any of my internet presence elsewhere (than this thread), I would not come across as hotheaded as I do here.

~Justme8800

P.S. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. May you all have a cheap ass black friday!
 
It seems almost everyone understands what you are saying. However, only a very few agree with you. Most either, don't agree or don't care either way. It's one thing to be an activist and a complete other thing to be an asshat.

Reasons have been given why Cheapy went with the ads, he even said so on his podcast. They are valid reasons, whether you agree or not, and people have pointed that out in this very thread. You just had to go on and on, contradicting yourself all along the way. You entered the asshat territory long ago.
 
[quote name='Kosh']It seems almost everyone understands what you are saying. However, only a very few agree with you. Most either, don't agree or don't care either way. It's one thing to be an activist and a complete other thing to be an asshat.

Reasons have been given why Cheapy went with the ads, he even said so on his podcast. They are valid reasons, whether you agree or not, and people have pointed that out in this very thread. You just had to go on and on, contradicting yourself all along the way. You entered the asshat territory long ago.[/QUOTE]

I agree... after reading 5 pages of replies. I understand Justme8800's point, but at the same time he just keep on digging his hole bigger and bigger.
 
[quote name='Kosh']It seems almost everyone understands what you are saying. However, only a very few agree with you. Most either, don't agree or don't care either way. It's one thing to be an activist and a complete other thing to be an asshat.

Reasons have been given why Cheapy went with the ads, he even said so on his podcast. They are valid reasons, whether you agree or not, and people have pointed that out in this very thread. You just had to go on and on, contradicting yourself all along the way. You entered the asshat territory long ago.[/quote]

OK, now I know you're just trolling me. I'm not even gonna bite that.

And it's not like I haven't seen any of the reasons for, it's that none of them outbalance the reasons against.

[quote name='Slayzz']I agree... after reading 5 pages of replies. I understand Justme8800's point, but at the same time he just keep on digging his hole bigger and bigger.[/quote]

That's one way to put it. Even as I've tried to lay my case clearer and clearer (or deeper and deeper, as you say), I've done my best to do it without wonton obscene insults, unlike some here who seem to enjoy provoking me.

I just really have trouble wrapping my head around the fact that so many people are swallowing this stunt hook line and sinker. Something that should be drawing an uproar from the listener community is flying over their heads, and they're hardly noticing it. How am I supposed to react other than to keep screaming, hoping that somewhere, someone else will take off their blinders.

As it seems, most of you guys seem perfectly content with this outrageous supplement. If that's honestly the way you feel, you don't have to keep telling me how my body is arranged, posts like that are not helpful to anyone. If you want to argue a point, that's great, but argue the point, not the one making it.

Really, I don't see why you guys are focusing on me here. Do you think the democratic points argued by Hillary Clinton are stupid because she's crap at debating? Are republican points argued by Fred Thompson stupid because he's the one saying them? I agree, those are bad examples, but just because you don't think highly of the one talking doesn't mean what they say is necessarily wrong. I am not what we're arguing about.

~Justme8800
 
People are getting a little silly by stating that we are "getting" the 'cast for free.

Would anyone in their right mind pay for an amateur fan-made podcast?

I listen to it when I'm bored and it's fun, but there is nothing of value in anything that is said (granted the guest spots are a step in that direction).

I would say we are doing Cheapy more of a service by listening... if it wasn't for the people on this site, who the heck would Digg it or recommend it to others?
 
[quote name='Justme8800']
And it's not like I haven't seen any of the reasons for, it's that none of them outbalance the reasons against. [/quote]

Once again you state your opinion as fact and the asshattery continues.





[quote name='willardhaven']People are getting a little silly by stating that we are "getting" the 'cast for free.

Would anyone in their right mind pay for an amateur fan-made podcast?

I listen to it when I'm bored and it's fun, but there is nothing of value in anything that is said (granted the guest spots are a step in that direction).

I would say we are doing Cheapy more of a service by listening... if it wasn't for the people on this site, who the heck would Digg it or recommend it to others?[/quote]

You just made the best possible argument for Cheapy's reasoning for having the advertisements.

Having "A" list advertisers makes the show look more professional and not like an amatuer fan-made podcast. I'm sure there are lots of people that dismiss the podcast because of the same reasons you gave. Including probably some potential guests.

Now, since the podcast is being recognized by "A" list advertisers maybe some people and potential guests will recognize the podcast as being something worthwhile. Advertisers aren't going to pay money if the podcast isn't being listened to, their ad dollars would be wasted. This in turn may make potential guests want to be on the show more often.
 
Not liking the ads and denying their value as a business move are two separate things.

That said I suppose I am naive in thinking that improving the quality of the podcast should take priority over gaining advertisers.

In the end it's up to Cheapy, I don't expect him to stop the ads because I dislike them. I have the power to fast forward through them or not listen to the podcast, but why attack the OP for criticizing?
 
[quote name='Kosh']Once again you state your opinion as fact and the asshattery continues.[/quote]

When did I say it was fact? I said it, so I would have thought the implication was clear that it was my opinion. Sorry, I'll clarify it: it is my opinion that none of the reasons for the ads outbalance the reasons against. Or was that another troll too? I can't tell with you.

Sheesh, since when was everything I say fact? Although I should be honored that you revered my word so much. Sorry to let you down, but believe it or not I have an opinion too.

~Justme8800
 
I only skimmed this thread because there is way too much BS to sift through, but anyways....

Working for a TV station, I can tell you that without advertising, there would be no TV, no radio. Unless people are willing to shell out huge dollars to cover the costs of production, which are far higher than your cable provider charges.

Whether or not a viewer or group of viewers don't like a certain advertisement, it doesn't matter. As already mentioned, anytime you get a Grade-A advertiser, such as the Navy in this case, turning them down would be a bad idea. By running their ad, you open many more doors to other Grade-A advertisers. "If Company X is running their ads on this show, maybe we, Company Y, should as well."

Sure, there are going to be ads that viewers won't like. Take those 1 minute (as I call them) spam commercials. "Work from home! Be your own boss! Crazy like a fox!" They are obnoxious as hell, but they pay very, very well for airtime. And that is what it comes down to. Basically, limited commercial time will go to the highest bidder.

The more sponsorship you get, the higher the production values can be. A bigger, better show is possible. And when a show gets bigger and better, more exclusivity in stories and previews is possible.

That's what it comes down to. It's not a middle-finger to the viewer, as some people see it. It's about paying the bills and having the ability to do more for the viewers.

Kind of off-topic, but here's a fun thing for you to do. Next time you watch your local news, time out how many minutes of the show is commercials. Write it down and hold onto it for sweeps-season. Time out the commercial time and compare. I can guarantee 10-20% increase in commercials. Why? Prime commercial viewership opportunity. More people want to advertise and will pay for it. Same reason for Superbowl airtime being so expensive.
 
Honestly, you should read the thread before making a comment, because that was useless. Podcasts are a completely different beast than TV programs.

This thread is filled with users who are just mindlessly repeating Cheapy and Wombat's reasoning for the ads without even reading the OP's opinion. Any real argument or thought has been destroyed by Kosh, who has resorted to semantics.

It's really kind of disgusting to see somebody under constant attack because of their moral opinions. I'm sorry if you don't agree with him, but he has the right to share his views in an open forum.

It's not surprising his posts sound "high and mighty." If you were defending your opinions against all these internet tough guys you wouldn't want to sound like an idiot, would you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top