Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="James from London" data-source="post: 398782" data-attributes="member: 22">I wasn&#039;t suggesting otherwise. I love the fact that last week&#039;s Beatles episode, &#039;Flux&#039;, &#039;Trial of a Time Lord&#039; (even though I didn&#039;t enjoy a lot of &#039;Trial of a Time Lord&#039;) and &#039;An Unearthly Child&#039;, while each completely different to each other, are all part of the same thing. I really enjoy zigzagging through different eras. That&#039;s what&#039;s so fun about the massive historical chronological video I&#039;m working my way through: one minute you&#039;re watching the whole of ‘The Space Museum’ in the wrong order followed by five seconds of Peter Capaldi and Jenna Coleman, then a glimpse of Tom Baker and Lalla Ward, followed by four episodes of &#039;Time Flight&#039;.I said they take it more seriously, not too seriously. But granted, it was a generalisation: fandom is made up of many individuals who don&#039;t necessarily all share the same opinion of every aspect of Who.&nbsp; But then, that makes me wonder: if, as you say, the opinions of the fandom are important and should be acted upon by the programme makers, which opinions are they meant to take notice of? Some of Steven Moffat&#039;s episodes have been voted the most popular in all of Who, yet he was driven off social media because a sizeable chunk of &quot;the fandom&quot; were so horrible about his run of the show. You clearly dislike the Chibnall era yet others were very moved by and deeply invested in the Doctor&#039;s relationship with Yaz. There&#039;s lots of positivity about the newest episodes while a vocal contingent are disgusted at how &quot;woke&quot; (such a meaningless word)&nbsp; they are. Who gets to decide which opinions have more credibility and should be taken notice of?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="James from London, post: 398782, member: 22"] I wasn't suggesting otherwise. I love the fact that last week's Beatles episode, 'Flux', 'Trial of a Time Lord' (even though I didn't enjoy a lot of 'Trial of a Time Lord') and 'An Unearthly Child', while each completely different to each other, are all part of the same thing. I really enjoy zigzagging through different eras. That's what's so fun about the massive historical chronological video I'm working my way through: one minute you're watching the whole of ‘The Space Museum’ in the wrong order followed by five seconds of Peter Capaldi and Jenna Coleman, then a glimpse of Tom Baker and Lalla Ward, followed by four episodes of 'Time Flight'. I said they take it [I]more[/I] seriously, not [I]too[/I] seriously. But granted, it was a generalisation: fandom is made up of many individuals who don't necessarily all share the same opinion of every aspect of [I]Who[/I]. But then, that makes me wonder: if, as you say, the opinions of the fandom are important and should be acted upon by the programme makers, which opinions are they meant to take notice of? Some of Steven Moffat's episodes have been voted the most popular in all of [I]Who[/I], yet he was driven off social media because a sizeable chunk of "the fandom" were so horrible about his run of the show. You clearly dislike the Chibnall era yet others were very moved by and deeply invested in the Doctor's relationship with Yaz. There's lots of positivity about the newest episodes while a vocal contingent are disgusted at how "woke" (such a meaningless word) they are. Who gets to decide which opinions have more credibility and should be taken notice of? [/QUOTE]

Verification

Who played Sue Ellen in Dallas?