Recent UK Top Gear Episode (26th July)

[Jerram]

Was anybody else quite dissatisfied at Episode 6 of this season of UK Top Gear? Personally I think it was my least favorite episode in the entire Series. (All 13 Seasons)

What they got up to just wasn't entertaining like it has been in the past, and the staging in some parts was ridiculously obvious. The best part was the Brian Johnson interview, and that segment is normally my least favorite.

Things that annoyed me included

-The stupid dinosaur metaphor & accompanying visuals. like wtf?
-The Camera discussion re. Land Rover - somewhat rehearsed but also not very interesting.
-The three co-drivers. Obviously they were all acting to an extent. (eg. the midget innuendo - even if it wasn't staged it still wasn't very fun)

Sure hope they put in a better performance next week; I can think of Top Gear Australia episodes better then this one.

[DirtyHarry]

actually i find it quite entertaining...one of the better episodes so far in this series.

[nuggz]

actually i find it quite entertaining...one of the better episodes so far in this series.

+1

but i have found this season to be a bit of a stinker

[Hackstra]

Nah enjoyed this episode, i give it thumbs up, just dont take it so seriously! i loved mays car such a heap of

[USC]

dude..I have watched half of the episode so far and it is fantastic...dunno what you are on about...Its about cars but also about british humour;).

[poita]

not sure what your on about Jerram.
i thought it was a good episode

[Jerram]

maybe I was just in a bad mood when I watched it, but I can definitely think of much more entertaining episodes.

[[OPCSRi]]

wasn't bad. Loved the tyre frying Brabus twin turbo V12 merc.:D

[mania]

Haven't been any amazing episodes this season... but it wasn't any better/worse then the rest imo.

[dieselhead]

Come on guys, any car show featuring air bags like the ones in James May's car is well worth watching :)

[Vectracious]

Haven't been any amazing episodes this season... but it wasn't any better/worse then the rest imo.


+1 - nothing has really stood out so far - but even on their absolute worst day - the UK crew are way better than TG Oz (dunno if its my bias/preferance for British humour, but there you go.) :)

EDIT: havent seen the latest one yet - waiting to click over to the new month - over quota :mad:

[alts]

im watching this now this is hilarious. :)

[USC]

Havent you guys heard that BBC has cut down on funding for Top Gear? hence they are trying to do things a bit more cheaply..but it is still very entertaining. I wish they would do a Top Gear movie and release it at the cinema..:D....with heaps of hot british chicks ....hahaha

[mania]

Didn't know that :( turns out you're right (http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,28383,24858724-5016681,00.html). Actually saddened by that :p

[Wraith]

Havent you guys heard that BBC has cut down on funding for Top Gear? hence they are trying to do things a bit more cheaply..but it is still very entertaining. I wish they would do a Top Gear movie and release it at the cinema..:D....with heaps of hot british chicks ....hahaha

So does this mean that finally they can get back to the business of reviewing cars like when they 1st started out, rather than filling the show with BS like building car space shuttles and travelling around the World to race trains and boats and going to hidden forests to pick up exotic mushrooms and using a Veyron to bring it back home and all that other nonsense that's obviously costing them a fortune to do...:lol:

Love to see how this all pans out...:)

[DirtyHarry]

lol probably...but hey atleast they arent a typical boring car show...they are entertaining


So does this mean that finally they can get back to the business of reviewing cars like when they 1st started out, rather than filling the show with BS like building car space shuttles and travelling around the World to race trains and boats and going to hidden forests to pick up exotic mushrooms and using a Veyron to bring it back home and all that other nonsense that's obviously costing them a fortune to do...:lol:

Love to see how this all pans out...:)

[dieselhead]

So let's see, BBC slashing the budget and car manufacturers, if not collapsing all together due to tens of billions annual losses, put their hot models and prototypes on ice (or in the back shed, for good) while us, the car industry's consumers and fans of the show, have less and less money to spend on motoring... This is not going to end well...

Bloody GFC! :(

[Vectracious]

So does this mean that finally they can get back to the business of reviewing cars like when they 1st started out, rather than filling the show with BS like building car space shuttles and travelling around the World to race trains and boats and going to hidden forests to pick up exotic mushrooms and using a Veyron to bring it back home and all that other nonsense that's obviously costing them a fortune to do...:lol:

Love to see how this all pans out...:)

hope not. One of my favourite ever episodes was when JC drove the Merc SLR McLaren to Norway while the other two went via boat. Epic :D

[gman]

+1 - nothing has really stood out so far - but even on their absolute worst day - the UK crew are way better than TG Oz (dunno if its my bias/preferance for British humour, but there you go.) :)

EDIT: havent seen the latest one yet - waiting to click over to the new month - over quota :mad:

HAHAHAHA...Internet usage quota's... :D (I had too...)


hope not. One of my favourite ever episodes was when JC drove the Merc SLR McLaren to Norway while the other two went via boat. Epic :D

+1..That was GOLD!!!Especially breaking 2 boats and a very sea sick Hammond in the background throwing up...

I like the races they did...The Veyron one was great..The 3 Supercars (Porsche GT3RS, Lambo & Aston) they took to Euroland was amazing!!!

I hope they still do things like the Polar/Vietnam/Africa specials...They are such good viewing...

[AH08]

So does this mean that finally they can get back to the business of reviewing cars like when they 1st started out, rather than filling the show with BS like building car space shuttles and travelling around the World to race trains and boats and going to hidden forests to pick up exotic mushrooms and using a Veyron to bring it back home and all that other nonsense that's obviously costing them a fortune to do...:lol:
Love to see how this all pans out...:)

I think they ate the mushies while dreaming up what to do next. The show has lost its way and gone to shit. The show is now B O R E I N G dribble so I wont bother to watch from now on, but that's just my opinion, if you like it, continue to watch it.

[Jerram]

I think they ate the mushies while dreaming up what to do next. The show has lost its way and gone to shit. The show is now B O R I N G dribble so I wont bother to watch from now on, but that's just my opinion. If you like it, continue to watch it.

Sorry mate but if I hate one thing it's run-on sentences.

[gman]

I think they ate the mushies while dreaming up what to do next. The show has lost its way and gone to shit. The show is now B O R E I N G dribble so I wont bother to watch from now on, but that's just my opinion, if you like it, continue to watch it.


Sorry mate but if I hate one thing it's run-on sentences.

Actually Jerram it isn't...There are actually full stops & comma's in the sentence, and adequate spacing...So, your point is?????

[AH08]

Actually Jerram it isn't...There are actually full stops & comma's in the sentence, and adequate spacing...So, your point is?????

He needs thicker glasses!:D

[Jerram]

Actually Jerram it isn't...There are actually full stops & commas (no apostrophe necessary for plurals) in the sentence, and adequate spacing...So, your point is?????

You shouldn't put too many statements in a single sentence. When you tack on extra ideas to an existing conflict/resolution style sentence it becomes a run on.

So in the example above;

The show is now boring dribble etc. is the "conflict"
I won't bother to watch it etc. is the "resolution"
and there is a permissible qualifier in but that's just my opinion

There could be a case for adding a semicolon after that's just my opinion, but in my belief the reader should be taking a sentence pause there. In any case, he changes ideas from talking about himself to making a suggestion to the reader. A full stop helps to separate these ideas.

[sooty]

as long as there are fewer than 8 seperate ideas seperated by commas, the sentence is still classfied as legibile by definition;)

[hazrd]

top gear is cool :p

[gman]

You shouldn't put too many statements in a single sentence. When you tack on extra ideas to an existing conflict/resolution style sentence it becomes a run on.

So in the example above;

The show is now boring dribble etc. is the "conflict"
I won't bother to watch it etc. is the "resolution"
and there is a permissible qualifier in but that's just my opinion

There could be a case for adding a semicolon after that's just my opinion, but in my belief the reader should be taking a sentence pause there. In any case, he changes ideas from talking about himself to making a suggestion to the reader. A full stop helps to separate these ideas.

OK Jerram here goes...

This is a forum not an English class. I understand that you may wish to educate fellow users or express your own opinions, wants, desires and idiosyncrasies for the use and perfection of punctuation within the written English language. However it’s probably not required to attempt to correct others.

I also fully understand the use of commas (edited after my word check added for me) for plurals or to define ownership, however I am not inclined at this juncture to go back and re-edit what my corporations spell check may inadvertently and incorrectly insert in to my own sentences. I have most likely been drafting legal and other documentation longer than you have been out of training pants.

Whilst indeed there may be a case for the addition of a semicolon and to a lesser extend a full stop after the expression of a concept as described, however I stand by my previous statement. There is more than adequate punctuation in the original sentence. It does not run on endlessly without spaces, commas, semicolons or full stops. It is therefore by definition not a “run on sentence” as you described. Furthermore it is inconsequential if it is one of your pet hates.

Others use accepted abbreviations such as WTF, IMHO, ROFL etc. More so, users continually use “slang” or accepted usage spelling of words such as “sik”

So I ask again…. What exactly is your point??


As I to understand the argument put forth by you the above represents my conflict.


Below is my resolution...



If you are unable to process the concepts that are being presented to you in a sentence as they are not structured to your liking or there are to many presented to you at once, may I suggest reading them slowing or perhaps writing them down....



My opinion I will keep to myself...


EDITED:

However, for future reference, further SPAM, unwarranted, unsolicited, meaningless and trolling-like attempts at correcting others for whatever reason will be dealt with accordingly....

[PaulyJ]

Vote 1 - post of the year!

[Jerram]

heh well if you want the last word - take it.

you will notice however that, unlike yourself, I am in no way wishing to upset or inflame anyone (do I use any personal attacks?) I believe I am well within my rights to inform one of given practice, especially within a thread of my own creation. I also believe I am entitled to justify without malice any claims that I make and my additions to this thread have been entirely within that nature.

[PaulyJ]

Jerram, you try to make it your right to correct people in threads other than your own.
Shut up and deal with it. Everybody writes differently, whether it is written grammatically or not.

[Jerram]

so if I can't suggest to someone my opinion, why should anyone else be able to suggest theirs, especially given the nature of my "thread that started it all" verses some of the language people have been using at me?

Furthermore this is certainly not the first time that people have suggested other members utilize good grammar when posting, nor will it be the last. It is hardly "trolling", because trolling is carried out with the sole purpose of inflaming another, and that was not at all my intention.


oh by the way if you're spectating this I hope you're having fun.

[PaulyJ]

Our suggestions aren't baseless

[Jerram]

so do you believe that mine was?

do you think I wrote that for the fun of it? Posting for the sake of posting? If one stumbles is it not my duty to help him?

[PaulyJ]

You really make me laugh
No-one was 'stumbling', as proven quite eloquently by a highly educated member of this forum.

[Jerram]

You really make me laugh


I tend to have that effect. Let's not forget that my car has, of all things, a hood ornament.

In any case the sentence is technically considered a "multiple comma splice" which can be seen as a run-on. Look at Wikipedia if you want.

Even if I was incorrect, the fact that I believed I was correct means that I could not have been "trolling" or "spamming" thus any judgments made hastily with that belief in mind are ill-considered.

[gman]

heh well if you want the last word - take it.

you will notice however that, unlike yourself, I am in no way wishing to upset or inflame anyone (do I use any personal attacks?) I believe I am well within my rights to inform one of given practice, especially within a thread of my own creation. I also believe I am entitled to justify without malice any claims that I make and my additions to this thread have been entirely within that nature.

I was in no way having the last word as the thread was left open, as evidenced by your continued ability to post within the open thread...

Furthermore, I will not be drawn into a debate as to your beliefs as to what constitutes your "rights" and what you feel is "given practice". I disagree as do others. As for the personal attacks, thinly veiled passive aggressive comments still constitute the same by their very nature.

In addition I might point out that whether you start a thread or not, you do not own it, aside from those that are in specific sections. this is a General Discussion. As such, others are free to post related comments and opinions. Yours were not. Its really that simple.


so if I can't suggest to someone my opinion, why should anyone else be able to suggest theirs, especially given the nature of my "thread that started it all" verses some of the language people have been using at me?

Furthermore this is certainly not the first time that people have suggested other members utilize good grammar when posting, nor will it be the last. It is hardly "trolling", because trolling is carried out with the sole purpose of inflaming another, and that was not at all my intention.


oh by the way if you're spectating this I hope you're having fun.

Yes, of course you can state your opinions as everyone’s opinion is valued equally.

However, this is not a classroom, a grammar forum nor a roundtable discussion on the finer points of English language punctuation. I am yet to see you, through repetition or course of action, consistently correct others that have failed to correctly punctuate their posts on OA. The thread title is not English Grammar 101 as you well know, as pointed out you started it.

There is certainly at times calls for improved grammar, however the finer points of English that you are espousing here unwarranted and furthermore unnecessary. Conscience or not, it feels for all the world like “trolling” for conflict or posting SPAM to the same end in this situation for personal gratification or other self interest. As you said it was a “one of those things you hate” that drove your initial post.

Once again, a passive aggressive post that reads as a veiled threat is still by its very nature the same. That's two (2)..


so do you believe that mine was?

do you think I wrote that for the fun of it? Posting for the sake of posting? If one stumbles is it not my duty to help him?

Ok Jerram last time...

Yes, as previously stated. Please do not hide behind the mantle of an attempt to help another member’s ability punctuate their own sentences’ now this has progressed. On a car forum an opinion (in this instance your own) in the form of an English lesson on how to avoid one of your own "pet hates" (my term) in the form of a run on sentence is unwarranted SPAM and trolling for conflict.


I tend to have that effect. Let's not forget that my car has, of all things, a hood ornament.

In any case the sentence is technically considered a "multiple comma splice" which can be seen as a run-on. Look at Wikipedia if you want.

Even if I was incorrect, the fact that I believed I was correct means that I could not have been "trolling" or "spamming" thus any judgments made hastily with that belief in mind are ill-considered.

If you are relying on Wikipedia for English grammar guidance I now have a greater understanding of the issue at hand. Whilst multiple concepts were introduced, they are done so in the correct manner despite your personal hatred for sentences with multiple concepts contained within.

Whilst not wishing to further introduce complex concepts into an otherwise fruitless debate, your comments were indeed incorrect. However a review post-event does not remove the intention, perceived or otherwise viewed as intentional, behind your initial comments. A such, any judgments made were neither ill-conceived, poorly founded and were indeed well though out and subject to subjective and serious scrutiny.

That's three (3) and counting Jerram...

However, earlier comments stand...

Trolling and SPAM for personal gratification, conflict et al will not be tolerated...

[Jerram]

Firstly I am hardly relying on Wikipedia, it is just a general reference that is acceptable to a suitable level.

Also if I was going to "troll for conflict" why would I start my post by saying "sorry." I don't know what you think my agenda is, but what it is not is causing trouble. Furthermore I do not appreciate accusations that I am trying to "thinly veil attacks". Other then this I will not pass judgment on your actions and will only state that there is an obvious conflict of opinion.

Look I'm going to keep defending myself as is my right so you might as well lock or delete this thread. In any case I think it's served it's purpose of ascertaining that last Sunday's Top Gear episode was not as bad as I believed.

[gman]

Firstly I am hardly relying on Wikipedia, it is just a general reference that is acceptable to a suitable level.

Also if I was going to "troll for conflict" why would I start my post by saying "sorry." I don't know what you think my agenda is, but what it is not is causing trouble. Furthermore I do not appreciate accusations that I am trying to "thinly veil attacks". Other then this I will not pass judgment on your actions and will only state that there is an obvious conflict of opinion.

Look I'm going to keep defending myself as is my right so you might as well lock or delete this thread. In any case I think it's served it's purpose of ascertaining that last Sunday's Top Gear episode was not as bad as I believed.

People repeatedly undertaking what is essentially trolling, whether intentional or not is by its nature the same. Starting with "sorry" does not absolve you of responsibility the same as saying "sorry" right before pointing a gun at someone and shooting does not remove the intention behind it. That is a very weak reliance on a soft defence.

As for your agenda I do not know nor is it my business. I simply request that people respect the forum and its rules, not instigate or insight others by your beligerence.

As to my comments on "thinly veiled attacks", they are seen for what they are, passive aggressive or not, unintentional or not they are what they are.

This has served its purpose. No more need be said.

As such, thread closed