Which reminds me that we will definitely need writers. I don't like the idea of the host/moderator just winging it.
Ooh, I could do that. I don't have a good voice (I stutter and talk way too fast), but I can provide a nice snarky/mocking/serious framework for discussion.
And I could help!
Rent on
0
Options
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
oh dude this is cool
I would love to help but i think I would just watch
I'm not very good at thinking off the top of my head on these sorts of things :P
So far it sounds like we'll need the following people:
Producer(s) - coordinate schedules, editorial, keep time during the show
Writers/Researchers - choose segments, research topics, write scripts
Sound Guy - editing and post-production
Host/Moderator
Round Table Talkers
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited October 2009
One more heads up: there should be a segment for error corrections from any previous podcast. Because we're classy folks here who can admit to being wrong or mistaken.
Right?
Henroid on
0
Options
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
So far it sounds like we'll need the following people:
Producer(s) - coordinate schedules, editorial, keep time during the show
Writers/Researchers - choose segments, research topics, write scripts
Sound Guy - editing and post-production
Host/Moderator
Round Table Talkers
I'm very good at writing, and I tend to have good personality for television/radio. Writing, hosting or talking are all thumbs up.
Today is a busy, busy day for me, but I just wanted to chime in again.
Everyone who has said they're in, please note which of those positions you'd be interested in taking or suggest another position you think would be useful.
One more heads up: there should be a segment for error corrections from any previous podcast. Because we're classy folks here who can admit to being wrong or mistaken.
Right?
This assumes that we've been wrong at some point in the past
Pretty much categorically untrue by any stretch of the imagination
Rent on
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
Everyone who has said they're in, please note which of those positions you'd be interested in taking or suggest another position you think would be useful.
It really depends on frequency of podcasts, but I'd love to help write esp. if CC is onboard (me and CC are good friends outside of PA so we hang out a lot, plus we talk a shitload of politics even outside PA so it's kind of a natural fit)
I work for 24 hours every other day with no internet access...just so you know
I AM THE WORST VOLUNTEER EVER
Rent on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
I can be a round table guy, but I think I'm more Centrist than anything.
Fencingsax on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
One more heads up: there should be a segment for error corrections from any previous podcast. Because we're classy folks here who can admit to being wrong or mistaken.
Right?
This assumes that we've been wrong at some point in the past
Pretty much categorically untrue by any stretch of the imagination
Well I mean, you never know when something will get said and then oops, we were off a bit. There's nothing wrong with a safety net.
Everyone who has said they're in, please note which of those positions you'd be interested in taking or suggest another position you think would be useful.
Roundtable discussion participant.
Edit - My qualification is that I can change the pitch of my voice to sound like a woman (I don't have the classic "radio voice" people are so concerned with).
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
Man I dunno, I really want to be involved, but I don't think I'm good at any of them, and I won't know until the ball gets rolling how everything works
Man I dunno, I really want to be involved, but I don't think I'm good at any of them, and I won't know until the ball gets rolling how everything works
You can jump in with Rent and me. We'll have fun, I promise. All GoogleDocs-ing the night away and shit.
Man I dunno, I really want to be involved, but I don't think I'm good at any of them, and I won't know until the ball gets rolling how everything works
Yeah, I definitely need to wait and see. For example, I think I could do a research type thing, but we'd have to see.
Yeah, I would be much more interested in adding that kind of context than doing a straight 'news of the week' kind of thing.
I actually was thinking the other day how awesome it would be to have a sort of talk show called Convince Me or something like that, where you have the host, who has a stated opinion on something, and a guest who tries to change his mind about it, where they actually have the time and inclination to get into the details, and actually be willing to consider the side. I don't know how feasible that would be though.
Anyway, I'm probably best suited to the Hosting/Moderating/Reading aspect, though I probably would also try to do some writing/editing as well. I kind of envision it as having different groups of writers off doing whatever, and then they all submit pieces for a weekly broadcast, and the producers pick the best ones, so it doesn't have to be centralized direction.
Yeah, I would be much more interested in adding that kind of context than doing a straight 'news of the week' kind of thing.
I actually was thinking the other day how awesome it would be to have a sort of talk show called Convince Me or something like that, where you have the host, who has a stated opinion on something, and a guest who tries to change his mind about it, where they actually have the time and inclination to get into the details, and actually be willing to consider the side. I don't know how feasible that would be though.
Anyway, I'm probably best suited to the Hosting/Moderating/Reading aspect, though I probably would also try to do some writing/editing as well. I kind of envision it as having different groups of writers off doing whatever, and then they all submit pieces for a weekly broadcast, and the producers pick the best ones, so it doesn't have to be centralized direction.
Hah, I like that.
Not even someone who has a contrary opinion - just trying to convince some inveterate skeptic of something. Kind of like Win Ben Stein's money, except with convincing.
The skeptic could be comedically contrarian about everything.
And he would be played by John Hodgman.
Speaker on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited October 2009
How many people in D&D actually aren't apart of the general hive mind that goes on here though? I mean, not trying to be insulting but generally people here agree on most things.
Henroid on
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
Man I dunno, I really want to be involved, but I don't think I'm good at any of them, and I won't know until the ball gets rolling how everything works
You can jump in with Rent and me.
:winky:
We'll have fun, I promise. All GoogleDocs-ing the night away and shit.
How many people in D&D actually aren't apart of the general hive mind that goes on here though? I mean, not trying to be insulting but generally people here agree on most things.
There are many, many flavors of liberalism and a handful of conservatives. Even those who consider themselves on the more "conservative" side (Hi!) tend to be rational, passionate people.
The Crowing One on
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
How many people in D&D actually aren't apart of the general hive mind that goes on here though? I mean, not trying to be insulting but generally people here agree on most things.
We do disagree on a lot, it's always individual topics
Plus we can argue devil's advocate really well
Rent on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Everyone who has said they're in, please note which of those positions you'd be interested in taking or suggest another position you think would be useful.
I definitely wouldn't mind participating in some way. I'm not sure how great of a panelist I would be, but I love research. I still have access to my college's research database, though it may be a limited thing, so I can produce scholastic articles.
I think assigning at least one researcher to each panelist wouldn't be a bad idea. The panelist would have to do at least some preliminary research in order to acquaint themselves with the topic and form a basis for an opinion, but the assigned researcher would be in charge of digging around for specific details and counter arguments to the panelist's position. This way the panelist can focus on strengthening and incorporating information into their argument without also having to spend time digging around for in-depth information.
I definitely wouldn't mind participating in some way. I'm not sure how great of a panelist I would be, but I love research. I still have access to my college's research database, though it may be a limited thing, so I can produce scholastic articles.
I think assigning at least one researcher to each panelist wouldn't be a bad idea. The panelist would have to do at least some preliminary research in order to acquaint themselves with the topic and form a basis for an opinion, but the assigned researcher would be in charge of digging around for specific details and counter arguments to the panelist's position. This way the panelist can focus on strengthening and incorporating information into their argument without also having to spend time digging around for in-depth information.
I like the idea, but am not sure it will be feasible. As a compromise, I think it would work best if the researchers and writers for the show posted their sources and a writeup of each segment for everyone to see prior to the show. Also, I just really want the people on the panel to do their own legwork. My vision of such a panel is basically like an out loud version of our threads around here (minus much of the caustic rhetoric), wherein coming to the debate uninformed or misinformed means you lose hard.
EDIT: And while I'm thinking of it, while the moderator should be fair to the panelists, I don't want him/her to be like these cable hosts who don't want to give an opinion. In fact, I'd like it if the moderator were to have a few minutes to editorialize on the topic of the day. During the round table discussion, the moderator should also participate where appropriate in addition to directing the flow of the conversation.
Although I'd be less interested in news and opinion than providing the sort of context that current outlets don't cover.
Like maybe providing a ten minute history of a country before our bombs detonate across its landscape.
Or ten minutes talking about what different kinds of health systems other countries have.
So I sign up.
This would be excellent.
I think conceptually this is easier if you split it up into segments of about ten minutes.
The week's major headline, focus on that for 10 minutes.
Speaker's in depth breakdown.
Mockery (with Jeffe making awful jokes, preferably)
I like the idea of an in house contrarian (Yar?)
Round table for two segments with like five minutes on each topic?
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited October 2009
Is the focus debate of an issue / topic or discussion thereof? I'm more interested in the latter, because I don't do a good job of "doing my homework" in preparation for the former.
Is the focus debate of an issue / topic or discussion thereof? I'm more interested in the latter, because I don't do a good job of "doing my homework" in preparation for the former.
Again, I liken it to an out loud version of our threads. People will give opinions, but being informed will get you much further than being uninformed.
Also, I like the time breakdown that enlightenedbum suggested.
Is the focus debate of an issue / topic or discussion thereof? I'm more interested in the latter, because I don't do a good job of "doing my homework" in preparation for the former.
Again, I liken it to an out loud version of our threads. People will give opinions, but being informed will get you much further than being uninformed.
Oh sure. Being informed for a debate takes more effort though and that intimidates me. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed but I usually ask questions or need clarifications on things. It's my style (like, when speaking in actual discussions too).
Is the focus debate of an issue / topic or discussion thereof? I'm more interested in the latter, because I don't do a good job of "doing my homework" in preparation for the former.
Again, I liken it to an out loud version of our threads. People will give opinions, but being informed will get you much further than being uninformed.
Oh sure. Being informed for a debate takes more effort though and that intimidates me. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed but I usually ask questions or need clarifications on things. It's my style (like, when speaking in actual discussions too).
We should work that angle, I think. Most people don't focus on politics the way we do. Maybe a segment on the important questions and issues the average person is/should be asking/talking about? The average Joe angle, I think you called it earlier.
Is the focus debate of an issue / topic or discussion thereof? I'm more interested in the latter, because I don't do a good job of "doing my homework" in preparation for the former.
Again, I liken it to an out loud version of our threads. People will give opinions, but being informed will get you much further than being uninformed.
Oh sure. Being informed for a debate takes more effort though and that intimidates me. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed but I usually ask questions or need clarifications on things. It's my style (like, when speaking in actual discussions too).
We should work that angle, I think. Most people don't focus on politics the way we do. Maybe a segment on the important questions and issues the average person is/should be asking/talking about? The average Joe angle, I think you called it earlier.
Even a section on "questions that aren't being asked" would help a lot of people to get a better grip on ideas.
I think that's one of the largest complaints, here, when media etc. debates leave those big gaping holes.
The Crowing One on
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
Is the focus debate of an issue / topic or discussion thereof? I'm more interested in the latter, because I don't do a good job of "doing my homework" in preparation for the former.
Again, I liken it to an out loud version of our threads. People will give opinions, but being informed will get you much further than being uninformed.
Oh sure. Being informed for a debate takes more effort though and that intimidates me. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed but I usually ask questions or need clarifications on things. It's my style (like, when speaking in actual discussions too).
We should work that angle, I think. Most people don't focus on politics the way we do. Maybe a segment on the important questions and issues the average person is/should be asking/talking about? The average Joe angle, I think you called it earlier.
I've always been intrigued by the concept of an interviewer who is not only genuinely interested in the topic or person they're questioning, but also asks questions that the average person would ask (because they really are asking the questions, not just "dumbing it down"). It sort of adds a natural quality to the interview.
Also, the natural reaction of "Wait a minute, wut?" can be enlightening.
Is the focus debate of an issue / topic or discussion thereof? I'm more interested in the latter, because I don't do a good job of "doing my homework" in preparation for the former.
Again, I liken it to an out loud version of our threads. People will give opinions, but being informed will get you much further than being uninformed.
Oh sure. Being informed for a debate takes more effort though and that intimidates me. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed but I usually ask questions or need clarifications on things. It's my style (like, when speaking in actual discussions too).
We should work that angle, I think. Most people don't focus on politics the way we do. Maybe a segment on the important questions and issues the average person is/should be asking/talking about? The average Joe angle, I think you called it earlier.
Even a section on "questions that aren't being asked" would help a lot of people to get a better grip on ideas.
I think that's one of the largest complaints, here, when media etc. debates leave those big gaping holes.
Call it "We're Not Gonna Leave It There."
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Posts
And I could help!
I would love to help but i think I would just watch
I'm not very good at thinking off the top of my head on these sorts of things :P
NNID: Hakkekage
And cookies.
Producer(s) - coordinate schedules, editorial, keep time during the show
Writers/Researchers - choose segments, research topics, write scripts
Sound Guy - editing and post-production
Host/Moderator
Round Table Talkers
Right?
Or research/write
NNID: Hakkekage
I'm very good at writing, and I tend to have good personality for television/radio. Writing, hosting or talking are all thumbs up.
Today is a busy, busy day for me, but I just wanted to chime in again.
This assumes that we've been wrong at some point in the past
Pretty much categorically untrue by any stretch of the imagination
It really depends on frequency of podcasts, but I'd love to help write esp. if CC is onboard (me and CC are good friends outside of PA so we hang out a lot, plus we talk a shitload of politics even outside PA so it's kind of a natural fit)
I work for 24 hours every other day with no internet access...just so you know
I AM THE WORST VOLUNTEER EVER
Well I mean, you never know when something will get said and then oops, we were off a bit. There's nothing wrong with a safety net.
Roundtable discussion participant.
Edit - My qualification is that I can change the pitch of my voice to sound like a woman (I don't have the classic "radio voice" people are so concerned with).
I can also round table talk, but I don't think I have a very good radio voice.
Our first game is now available for free on Google Play: Frontier: Isle of the Seven Gods
NNID: Hakkekage
You can jump in with Rent and me. We'll have fun, I promise. All GoogleDocs-ing the night away and shit.
Yeah, I definitely need to wait and see. For example, I think I could do a research type thing, but we'd have to see.
Although I'd be less interested in news and opinion than providing the sort of context that current outlets don't cover.
Like maybe providing a ten minute history of a country before our bombs detonate across its landscape.
Or ten minutes talking about what different kinds of health systems other countries have.
So I sign up.
I actually was thinking the other day how awesome it would be to have a sort of talk show called Convince Me or something like that, where you have the host, who has a stated opinion on something, and a guest who tries to change his mind about it, where they actually have the time and inclination to get into the details, and actually be willing to consider the side. I don't know how feasible that would be though.
Anyway, I'm probably best suited to the Hosting/Moderating/Reading aspect, though I probably would also try to do some writing/editing as well. I kind of envision it as having different groups of writers off doing whatever, and then they all submit pieces for a weekly broadcast, and the producers pick the best ones, so it doesn't have to be centralized direction.
Hah, I like that.
Not even someone who has a contrary opinion - just trying to convince some inveterate skeptic of something. Kind of like Win Ben Stein's money, except with convincing.
The skeptic could be comedically contrarian about everything.
And he would be played by John Hodgman.
:winky:
Man what
HIVE RAGE
SWARM! SWARM!
There are many, many flavors of liberalism and a handful of conservatives. Even those who consider themselves on the more "conservative" side (Hi!) tend to be rational, passionate people.
We do disagree on a lot, it's always individual topics
Plus we can argue devil's advocate really well
That doesn't work when it's a long-standing position in a topic. When it's like a one or two question thing, briefly, it's fine.
I'd be willing to help out with writing/research
Nobody needs a good radio voice for roundtable discussions. They need to be able to discuss things intelligently in the round.
Radio voices are for people like me, who like to talk, sound good while talking, but never have anything worth saying.
I think assigning at least one researcher to each panelist wouldn't be a bad idea. The panelist would have to do at least some preliminary research in order to acquaint themselves with the topic and form a basis for an opinion, but the assigned researcher would be in charge of digging around for specific details and counter arguments to the panelist's position. This way the panelist can focus on strengthening and incorporating information into their argument without also having to spend time digging around for in-depth information.
I like the idea, but am not sure it will be feasible. As a compromise, I think it would work best if the researchers and writers for the show posted their sources and a writeup of each segment for everyone to see prior to the show. Also, I just really want the people on the panel to do their own legwork. My vision of such a panel is basically like an out loud version of our threads around here (minus much of the caustic rhetoric), wherein coming to the debate uninformed or misinformed means you lose hard.
EDIT: And while I'm thinking of it, while the moderator should be fair to the panelists, I don't want him/her to be like these cable hosts who don't want to give an opinion. In fact, I'd like it if the moderator were to have a few minutes to editorialize on the topic of the day. During the round table discussion, the moderator should also participate where appropriate in addition to directing the flow of the conversation.
This would be excellent.
I think conceptually this is easier if you split it up into segments of about ten minutes.
The week's major headline, focus on that for 10 minutes.
Speaker's in depth breakdown.
Mockery (with Jeffe making awful jokes, preferably)
I like the idea of an in house contrarian (Yar?)
Round table for two segments with like five minutes on each topic?
Again, I liken it to an out loud version of our threads. People will give opinions, but being informed will get you much further than being uninformed.
Also, I like the time breakdown that enlightenedbum suggested.
Oh sure. Being informed for a debate takes more effort though and that intimidates me. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed but I usually ask questions or need clarifications on things. It's my style (like, when speaking in actual discussions too).
We should work that angle, I think. Most people don't focus on politics the way we do. Maybe a segment on the important questions and issues the average person is/should be asking/talking about? The average Joe angle, I think you called it earlier.
Even a section on "questions that aren't being asked" would help a lot of people to get a better grip on ideas.
I think that's one of the largest complaints, here, when media etc. debates leave those big gaping holes.
I've always been intrigued by the concept of an interviewer who is not only genuinely interested in the topic or person they're questioning, but also asks questions that the average person would ask (because they really are asking the questions, not just "dumbing it down"). It sort of adds a natural quality to the interview.
Also, the natural reaction of "Wait a minute, wut?" can be enlightening.
Call it "We're Not Gonna Leave It There."