Reviving the show.

[Gnug215]

A shooting-the-breeze show could be fine, but that would depend highly on the hosts.

We'd need some really, really fun and interesting people as hosts for that, and we don't really have that around here, do we?

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

A shooting-the-breeze show could be fine, but that would depend highly on the hosts.

We'd need some really, really fun and interesting people as hosts for that, and we don't really have that around here, do we?

Don't be modest, Gnug. You're more than funny.


Also, idea: to keep the repetitiveness down, try having one different topic per show. Might I suggest, a poll for each show, with many different topics to discuss. Each week (or whatever regularity thing you'll have going on), the previous topics are removed from the list and a new one is chosen.

 

[nasher168]

Really, we just need people who can be reasonably entertaining. Boring bits can be cut easily enough in editing.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

A shooting-the-breeze show could be fine, but that would depend highly on the hosts.

We'd need some really, really fun and interesting people as hosts for that, and we don't really have that around here, do we?

Don't be modest, Gnug. You're more than funny.

More in a `laughing at` than `laughing with` way...

 

[televator]

No, not quite. I think lighthearted is the correct general direction, though. I mean, come on, League of Reason?

Recorded live from the Hall of Logic!

Today's topic: Where do atheists get their etiquette from? How do you know what fork to use with your soup?

 

[australopithecus]

We'd need some really, really fun and interesting people as hosts for that, and we don't really have that around here, do we?

 

[Welshidiot]

We'd need some really, really fun and interesting people as hosts for that, and we don't really have that around here, do we?

Don't be modest, Gnug. You're more than funny.

I agree, Gnug is definitely a funny bugger.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

I'm not funny - but I tend to think that a bit of situational humor never hurt.

But yeah, Gnug is certainly hysterical.

"Hello. My name is Gnug. Goodbye."
*ban*

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Today's topic: Where do atheists get their etiquette from? How do you know what fork to use with your soup?

You say that in jest, but you've never seen my wife eat soup with those little oyster crackers. Or more accurately she eats the crackers with enough soup to moisten them and not much else.

 

[Aught3]

I think this is a great idea. Looking at the forums that get the most posts it seems 'Religion and Irreligion' and 'Science and Mathematics' are the most popular areas. Also up there are 'Politics' and 'News', but they are definitely second tier. I would say that building a show around religion and science with perhaps some brief forays into politics and news on occasion would be the most relevant for the current community and the most likely to bring in new people with something to say on those popular subjects.

It's probably a good idea not to worry about editing it at first, unless someone is really keen. It takes a lot of effort and might end up being the biggest delay to posting new episodes. An intro and an outro is easy enough, but going through each show and deciding what to keep and what to delete will be a pain.

I like the idea of having a rotating panel to try and get more voices involved without having too many on a single show. Maybe a host plus 2 or 3 other people is a good number?

Doing something different to what's already out there is always the biggest challenge...

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

Doing something different to what's already out there is always the biggest challenge...

How about make the show with panels involving both Atheists and Religious people where it's not a dog-eat-dog fiasco? "Rational Religion" is kinda contradictory, but I think that it works well enough for what we have going on here.

Especially when talking about Science!

Plus it would trim down on the douchebag typical dog-eat-dog shows out there.

 

[nasher168]

I like the idea of having a rotating panel to try and get more voices involved without having too many on a single show. Maybe a host plus 2 or 3 other people is a good number?

Doing something different to what's already out there is always the biggest challenge...

I don't see that there necessarily has to be a set host as such for a show. It could work quite well if everyone knows they should try and cover, say, four items over a 45 minute - 1 hour skype call, with one or more people recording it via PrettyMay or some such recording software.
If the show is less sort of... rigidly focussed on serious discussion and more on just relaxed chatting and fun, I think that might be enough to set it apart from the other ones currently out there. The Atheist Experience and Magic Sandwich Show do a fine job as it is on taking callers and pwnage and the like. But they tend to leave little room for more fun topics of conversation.

How about make the show with panels involving both Atheists and Religious people where it's not a dog-eat-dog fiasco?

'twould be quite an interesting one to do I imagine. Although the general, uh, lack of religious people around here might mean that not all shows would involve them.

 

[nasher168]

I'm thinking if we're going to get this off the ground, some kind of Skype call or calls would be in order sometime over the next few days or fortnight in order to get stuff together, decide things more firmly etc.

 

[Prolescum]

"Iiiiit's opening niiigghhhttt!! Ahhh the roar of the grease-paint, the smell of the crowd.....Did I ever tell you about the time I actually met Judy, at Steven Sondheim's apaarrrrtment? Dahling, it was simply deeevine!"

Lol, fuck off :lol:

That's a pretty good idea... might make a nice little background thing. Even for unimportant, "just chatting" type stuff it could conceivably have some use if one of the speakers is talking about a topic that could do with a picture.

Well, you can use it for whatever purpose you desire/require. I was thinking of something available if you download the podcast in a year's time, you can still sort of check our references.

iTunes is definitely a must, as is YouTube. I've never heard of Miro before, will have to look at that...

Have a look here http://www.getmiro.com/publish/guide/

We have that on record, we'll have to take you up with that

Okay.

Idea for a show:
Asshole day.

Probably not...

What would you specifically suggest the show did?

With broad strokes, I'd say that the basic podcast format, intro-news-main article/s-closing thoughts-outro works very well, and makes it relatively easy to edit. We're probably not going to be pulling in experts for anything, so to keep it simple, a single overall topic (perhaps suggested by the audience later on) two hosts and one, maybe two guests (per episode), reader/listener submitted articles of (relevant to the topic) interest for the "news" section (10-15 minutes discussion between hosts, perhaps lifting out the funniest/worst comments on related articles to poke fun at), main discussion with guests (20-30 minutes) prepared beforehand with questions and whatnot, thank yous, announcements, fin.

If people were interested in doing topic-related skits, it wouldn't be difficult to incorporate them, for example, as the introduction to the main article/s.

Perhaps we could have a rotating segment after the guests/interviews/whatever, one episode could be Enter debunker: best debunks of the last however long (audience submitted or host-chosen), another could be The Stark Remark awesome comment of the month (submitted to a thread from blogs or whatever).

I think it's best to keep it to once a month at the very most so there's enough time to prepare each episode and give it a sheen few others do. I also recommend a number of dress rehearsals before attempting it properly.

It's probably a good idea not to worry about editing it at first, unless someone is really keen. It takes a lot of effort and might end up being the biggest delay to posting new episodes. An intro and an outro is easy enough, but going through each show and deciding what to keep and what to delete will be a pain.

I suggest we actually kill as many birds with as few stones as possible; it's not that much more effort to record stuff for more than one episode. If say, there's an discussion about Occupy Wall Street and you've invited TheTruePooka to discuss it, there's no reason not to probe him on upcoming topics (which can become the talking points/prompts for discussion later on).

 

[Aught3]

How about make the show with panels involving both Atheists and Religious people where it's not a dog-eat-dog fiasco? "Rational Religion" is kinda contradictory, but I think that it works well enough for what we have going on here.

Yeah, like Apologia! But actually it would be interesting to take a more in-depth look at some of the other religions out there, I'm thinking Buddhism, Daoism, Kemetic paganism, etc, etc

I don't see that there necessarily has to be a set host as such for a show. It could work quite well if everyone knows they should try and cover, say, four items over a 45 minute - 1 hour skype call

I think even the type of show you are describing would work better with a host. Just someone to move everyone on to the next topic and to cut off arguments that aren't going anywhere. On the other hand maybe you could try out a couple of test shows just to see how well everything flows.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

How do you know what fork to use with your soup?

Fork with soup? That's easy, you roll an official 2n die from a AD&D set (where n must be n>1). Where n would be the number of forks placed in front of you. Reading the forks left to right, of course.

Use the following for guidelines:

One fork is fairly self-explanatory (you only have one fork).
Two forks: 1 or 2 left most fork, 3 or 4 right most fork.
Three Forks: 1 or 2 left most fork, 3 or 4 middle fork, 5 or 6 right most fork.
Four Forks: 1 or 2 left most fork, 3 or 4 left middle fork, 5 or 6 right middle fork, 7 or 8 right most fork.

 

[nasher168]

I think even the type of show you are describing would work better with a host. Just someone to move everyone on to the next topic and to cut off arguments that aren't going anywhere. On the other hand maybe you could try out a couple of test shows just to see how well everything flows.

I could see a set "host" being useful in those sort of situations I suppose. Although I would hope a relaxed format would get around heated arguments, for the most part.

Perhaps at some point (over the next month or fortnight or whatever) there could be a sort of "test show". A few people on Skype going through a set of topics (maybe including a general introduction to the revived show), we can see what works and what doesn't. We can see if editing is necessary and if it's awful, we can scrap it and try again some other time, possibly with different people (no pressure of course... the first people could maybe come on a later show if that happens). But if the default assumption is that it will go up, then at least everyone will behave as they would in a normal recording.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

"Fortnight"? Are you planning on doing this by carrier pigeon? :lol:

 

[nasher168]

"Fortnight"? Are you planning on doing this by carrier pigeon? :lol:

It's a fairly commonly-used term here...

But... yes

 

[Gnug215]

A shooting-the-breeze show could be fine, but that would depend highly on the hosts.

We'd need some really, really fun and interesting people as hosts for that, and we don't really have that around here, do we?

Don't be modest, Gnug. You're more than funny.

No no, trust me. I'm not funny. Most certainly not irl. Nor is my voice.

More in a `laughing at` than `laughing with` way...

Yes, pretty much.


I have very high standards for whether or not I like a host, and personally I fail all of them.

Now, we need auditions for hosts.

Applicants, record a video or something of a test show!