Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

'30 days' duration screwup

Tags:
  • Ptv Tivo
  • Tivo
  • Video
Last response: in Home Theatre Legacy
Share
June 16, 2005 1:16:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Wed night's episode of '30 days' on FX network wasn't recorded.
It seems they set the duration for an hour and one minute, so for
me it got tossed in favor of the higher priority Daily Show. With
all the problems Stewart's TDS has had with tivo scheduling, who
would have expected this turn-around? Ha! Anyway, this episode
"minimum wage" is on again Saturday, but is still listed as 61
minutes. Someone did use the correct time when they punched in
the length for the second episode "anti-aging", so that should
come out fine.

More about : days duration screwup

Anonymous
June 16, 2005 1:32:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Jason wrote:
> Wed night's episode of '30 days' on FX network wasn't recorded.
> It seems they set the duration for an hour and one minute, so for
> me it got tossed in favor of the higher priority Daily Show. With
> all the problems Stewart's TDS has had with tivo scheduling, who
> would have expected this turn-around? Ha! Anyway, this episode
> "minimum wage" is on again Saturday, but is still listed as 61
> minutes. Someone did use the correct time when they punched in
> the length for the second episode "anti-aging", so that should
> come out fine.
>

I don't actually think the 61 minute duration is a "mistake" by the
guide, lately many (notably "Lost" and "ER") have been slightly
lengthened so they can shove more commercials at us.

I do agree it is a "mistake" for them to do this, but it was intentional.

Randy S.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 2:25:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

<Jason> wrote in message news:54u2b11ft8bh1h899qvhe5mtj442ta1kpo@4ax.com...
>
> Wed night's episode of '30 days' on FX network wasn't recorded.
> It seems they set the duration for an hour and one minute, so for
> me it got tossed in favor of the higher priority Daily Show. With
> all the problems Stewart's TDS has had with tivo scheduling, who
> would have expected this turn-around? Ha! Anyway, this episode
> "minimum wage" is on again Saturday, but is still listed as 61
> minutes. Someone did use the correct time when they punched in
> the length for the second episode "anti-aging", so that should
> come out fine.
>

If you create a Manual M-F Season Pass for the morning airing
of The Daily Show you will no longer have conflicts with other programs
which run long. The other morning shows have consistent durations.
You might want to record TDS a minute longer to capture the Moment of Zen.

Occasionally, there will be a Monday morning preemption for a movie,
but since the Monday AM show is usually a repeat of the Friday morning
show, that isn't a problem.
Related resources
June 17, 2005 4:07:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

<Jason> wrote in message news:54u2b11ft8bh1h899qvhe5mtj442ta1kpo@4ax.com...
>
> Wed night's episode of '30 days' on FX network wasn't recorded.
> It seems they set the duration for an hour and one minute, so for
> me it got tossed in favor of the higher priority Daily Show. With
> all the problems Stewart's TDS has had with tivo scheduling, who
> would have expected this turn-around? Ha! Anyway, this episode
> "minimum wage" is on again Saturday, but is still listed as 61
> minutes. Someone did use the correct time when they punched in
> the length for the second episode "anti-aging", so that should
> come out fine.
>

It was not scheduled for 61 minutes - just 60 min. You must have added a
minute of buffer time to the end. I scheduled the second airing of '30
days' at 10:00 (central) on FX and had something else scheduled at 11:00 and
both shows were recorded.

So Ha! It was your own damn fault!
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 3:43:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 00:07:22 -0500, Zardoz wrote:

>
><Jason> wrote in message news:54u2b11ft8bh1h899qvhe5mtj442ta1kpo@4ax.com...
>>
>> Wed night's episode of '30 days' on FX network wasn't recorded.
>> It seems they set the duration for an hour and one minute, so for
>> me it got tossed in favor of the higher priority Daily Show. With
>> all the problems Stewart's TDS has had with tivo scheduling, who
>> would have expected this turn-around? Ha! Anyway, this episode
>> "minimum wage" is on again Saturday, but is still listed as 61
>> minutes. Someone did use the correct time when they punched in
>> the length for the second episode "anti-aging", so that should
>> come out fine.
>>
>
>It was not scheduled for 61 minutes - just 60 min. You must have added a
>minute of buffer time to the end. I scheduled the second airing of '30
>days' at 10:00 (central) on FX and had something else scheduled at 11:00 and
>both shows were recorded.
>
>So Ha! It was your own damn fault!
>

Nope, not my fault, the program itself is claiming a duration of
1:01, starts at 12:05 am on sat on FX. Both my recording options
are set 'on time', no padding before or after.

My guide says:
'The Shield' from 11pm to 12:05am,
'30 Days' from 12:05 to 1:06am,
'Married... with children' from 1:06 to 1:30
Here's a picture to prove it.

So, how do you explain this?
June 17, 2005 7:46:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Looks like you would still have had a problem even if it was 55 minutes
long.

--
--
Steven

May you have the peace and freedom that come from abandoning all hope of
having a better past.
--- - --- - - - - - - - -- - - - --- - ------ -
- --- - - -- - - - -- - - -
"J Noel" <j.noel@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:9mq5b1pbg923udbqh3r34acuvro1lci7mg@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 00:07:22 -0500, Zardoz wrote:
>
>>
>><Jason> wrote in message
>>news:54u2b11ft8bh1h899qvhe5mtj442ta1kpo@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> Wed night's episode of '30 days' on FX network wasn't recorded.
>>> It seems they set the duration for an hour and one minute, so for
>>> me it got tossed in favor of the higher priority Daily Show. With
>>> all the problems Stewart's TDS has had with tivo scheduling, who
>>> would have expected this turn-around? Ha! Anyway, this episode
>>> "minimum wage" is on again Saturday, but is still listed as 61
>>> minutes. Someone did use the correct time when they punched in
>>> the length for the second episode "anti-aging", so that should
>>> come out fine.
>>>
>>
>>It was not scheduled for 61 minutes - just 60 min. You must have added a
>>minute of buffer time to the end. I scheduled the second airing of '30
>>days' at 10:00 (central) on FX and had something else scheduled at 11:00
>>and
>>both shows were recorded.
>>
>>So Ha! It was your own damn fault!
>>
>
> Nope, not my fault, the program itself is claiming a duration of
> 1:01, starts at 12:05 am on sat on FX. Both my recording options
> are set 'on time', no padding before or after.
>
> My guide says:
> 'The Shield' from 11pm to 12:05am,
> '30 Days' from 12:05 to 1:06am,
> 'Married... with children' from 1:06 to 1:30
> Here's a picture to prove it.
>
> So, how do you explain this?
June 18, 2005 12:34:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"J Noel" <j.noel@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:9mq5b1pbg923udbqh3r34acuvro1lci7mg@4ax.com...
>
>
> Nope, not my fault, the program itself is claiming a duration of
> 1:01, starts at 12:05 am on sat on FX. Both my recording options
> are set 'on time', no padding before or after.
>
> My guide says:
> 'The Shield' from 11pm to 12:05am,
> '30 Days' from 12:05 to 1:06am,
> 'Married... with children' from 1:06 to 1:30
> Here's a picture to prove it.
>
> So, how do you explain this?

Well, that's tonights airing. Mine says the same thing. But the original
back to back airings (8:00 & 9:00) on Wednesday were both only 60 minutes.
My recording of a Wed. night airing shows that it started at 9:00 with a
duration of 1:00. My next recording is the 10:00 local news.
June 18, 2005 12:36:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"Zardoz" <thewizz@emcity.com> wrote in message
news:1118984851.5c85ddfbdb37ef36d098068853391e0f@teranews...
>
> <Jason> wrote in message
> news:54u2b11ft8bh1h899qvhe5mtj442ta1kpo@4ax.com...
>>
>> Wed night's episode of '30 days' on FX network wasn't recorded.
>> It seems they set the duration for an hour and one minute, so for
>> me it got tossed in favor of the higher priority Daily Show. With
>> all the problems Stewart's TDS has had with tivo scheduling, who
>> would have expected this turn-around? Ha! Anyway, this episode
>> "minimum wage" is on again Saturday, but is still listed as 61
>> minutes. Someone did use the correct time when they punched in
>> the length for the second episode "anti-aging", so that should
>> come out fine.
>>
>
> It was not scheduled for 61 minutes - just 60 min. You must have added a
> minute of buffer time to the end. I scheduled the second airing of '30
> days' at 10:00 (central) on FX and had something else scheduled at 11:00
> and both shows were recorded.
>
> So Ha! It was your own damn fault!
>
>

10 and 11 is wrong. change those times to 9:00 and 10:00
June 18, 2005 12:20:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"Zardoz" <thewizz@emcity.com> wrote in
news:1119058607.8047f9b7d0b87d0d7f1b931f3b4cb729@teranews:

>> It was not scheduled for 61 minutes - just 60 min. You must have
>> added a minute of buffer time to the end. I scheduled the second
>> airing of '30 days' at 10:00 (central) on FX and had something else
>> scheduled at 11:00 and both shows were recorded.
>>
>> So Ha! It was your own damn fault!
>>
>
He didn't mess up! Our record time was 61 minutes also!
June 18, 2005 9:51:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 08:20:35 GMT, John wrote:

>"Zardoz" <thewizz@emcity.com> wrote in
>news:1119058607.8047f9b7d0b87d0d7f1b931f3b4cb729@teranews:
>
>>> It was not scheduled for 61 minutes - just 60 min. You must have
>>> added a minute of buffer time to the end. I scheduled the second
>>> airing of '30 days' at 10:00 (central) on FX and had something else
>>> scheduled at 11:00 and both shows were recorded.
>>>
>>> So Ha! It was your own damn fault!
>>>
>>
>He didn't mess up! Our record time was 61 minutes also!

Thank you. I was beginning to think I shouldn't bother trying to
warn others when someone screws up the guide data.
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 10:55:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> Thank you. I was beginning to think I shouldn't bother trying to
> warn others when someone screws up the guide data.

How do you know the guide data was screwed up, and the show wasn't
actually scheduled that way? In fact, I bet it was. It may be
inconvenient as hell, but the networks are scheduling some shows that
way now.

Randy S.
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 11:51:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> All of the upcomming episodes of '30 Days' in my Tivo's guide are scheduled
> to run 60 minutes.

Then you must be in some parallel universe, because the Tivo on-line
guide confirms Jason's observations (though I don't see an episode on 6/23):

Sun 6/19 11:05 PM 23 FX
Duration: 1:01
No Rating
Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary

Wed 6/22 10:00 PM 23 FX
Duration: 1:01
No Rating
Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary

Wed 6/22 11:01 PM 23 FX
Duration: 1:01
No Rating
Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary

Sat 6/25 12:02 AM 23 FX
Duration: 1:01
No Rating
Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary

Sun 6/26 11:02 PM 23 FX
Duration: 1:01
No Rating
Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary


As to Jason's letter to FX; I would redo your letter and put it in much
simpler terms. Chances are that anybody who matters at FX will have no
clue about Tivo scheduling and DVR's except in the most vague way. They
have servants for that ;-). You could get lucky, but it's probably
better to simplify it.

Randy S.
June 19, 2005 4:33:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 07:51:59 -0400, Randy S. wrote:

> (though I don't see an episode on 6/23):

Nope, that's thursday, when I'll get to see wed. night's show.

And I don't know how much simpler to have sent that email.
Changing the duration just screams they are trying to pull a fast
one on us, and simpler might make it look more like I'm some
conspiracy nut... *shrug*

Oh, pull a fast one = quick swindle, or more like a speedy
bait-and-switch.
June 19, 2005 9:03:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"Randy S." <rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:D 93m8v$1fju$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
>> All of the upcomming episodes of '30 Days' in my Tivo's guide are
>> scheduled to run 60 minutes.
>
> Then you must be in some parallel universe, because the Tivo on-line guide
> confirms Jason's observations (though I don't see an episode on 6/23):
>
> Sun 6/19 11:05 PM 23 FX
> Duration: 1:01
> No Rating
> Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>
> Wed 6/22 10:00 PM 23 FX
> Duration: 1:01
> No Rating
> Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>
> Wed 6/22 11:01 PM 23 FX
> Duration: 1:01
> No Rating
> Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>
> Sat 6/25 12:02 AM 23 FX
> Duration: 1:01
> No Rating
> Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>
> Sun 6/26 11:02 PM 23 FX
> Duration: 1:01
> No Rating
> Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>
>

How convenenient for you to leave out the last three listed episodes

Now today I get a mixture.
The two episodes on Wed 6/29 and the one on Fri. 7/1 are now the only ones
that are listed with a 1:00 duration.
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 1:25:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Zardoz wrote:
> "Randy S." <rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:D 93m8v$1fju$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
>
>>>All of the upcomming episodes of '30 Days' in my Tivo's guide are
>>>scheduled to run 60 minutes.
>>
>>Then you must be in some parallel universe, because the Tivo on-line guide
>>confirms Jason's observations (though I don't see an episode on 6/23):
>>
>>Sun 6/19 11:05 PM 23 FX
>>Duration: 1:01
>>No Rating
>>Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>>
>>Wed 6/22 10:00 PM 23 FX
>>Duration: 1:01
>>No Rating
>>Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>>
>>Wed 6/22 11:01 PM 23 FX
>>Duration: 1:01
>>No Rating
>>Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>>
>>Sat 6/25 12:02 AM 23 FX
>>Duration: 1:01
>>No Rating
>>Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary
>>
>>Sun 6/26 11:02 PM 23 FX
>>Duration: 1:01
>>No Rating
>>Documentary, Reality, Interests, Documentary

>
> How convenenient for you to leave out the last three listed episodes
>
> Now today I get a mixture.
> The two episodes on Wed 6/29 and the one on Fri. 7/1 are now the only ones
> that are listed with a 1:00 duration.
>

I didn't pick and choose episodes to list, I only listed those that came
up on the Tivo.com list guide.

Randy S.
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 1:28:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Jason wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 07:51:59 -0400, Randy S. wrote:
>
>
>>(though I don't see an episode on 6/23):
>
>
> Nope, that's thursday, when I'll get to see wed. night's show.
>
> And I don't know how much simpler to have sent that email.
> Changing the duration just screams they are trying to pull a fast
> one on us, and simpler might make it look more like I'm some
> conspiracy nut... *shrug*
>
> Oh, pull a fast one = quick swindle, or more like a speedy
> bait-and-switch.
>

Well, it is a bit difficult to fathom the reasoning of the timing. Is
it to foil DVR users? To promote lead in to other programs on their
network? To shove in more commercials in that hour?

I was thinking that you shouldn't get into the details of how you use
your Tivo. Just say that you can only record one thing each time slot,
and since their program is extending into an extra time slot it causes
conflicts with later shows. Emphasize that if any such conflicts occur,
the show that will be left unrecorded will be the one that extends into
the extra time slot.

Randy S.
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 11:09:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> Well, I was only going by the information that I had, which was that those
> first two airings were only 60 minutes.
> Do you tend to believe info from usenet or info that you have first hand
> knowledge of? That's all I was doing.
>
> Now I'll add that you really should be checking the To Do List once in a
> while to make sure that you'll record what you expect to record. Especially
> since you seem to think that missing a recording is that big of a deal that
> you have to cry about it to the whole world on usenet. If you'd bother to
> check the To Do List you could have changed something to get the airing you
> expected. So I'll kindly remind you of what I said in my first post -
>
> "So Ha! It was your own damn fault!"
> The statement is still valid.

Look, don't be an ass. You were wrong, you went off half-cocked and
threw around accusations that were incorrect, whether or not you had
incorrect information to base it on. Jason's complaint was valid, and
we know what you were referring to when you said it was his own fault,
and it wasn't that he didn't check the to do list, don't try to revise
history. Next thing you're going to tell us is that you never said
there were WMD's in Iraq in the first place and that you wanted to
invade to "free the people" as the primary objective the whole time.

You still have a major problem of not being able to see beyond the end
of you nose. Other people have valid concerns that may not exactly
match yours. I agree with Jason, these scheduling shenanigans that the
networks are pulling are low and a pain in the ass. If it happened once
or twice it would be no big deal, but a lot of shows are doing it
regularly, and if no one complains than they'll do it more If it
happens enough then even Sean's precious dual tuner DVR will start
experiencing conflicts.

Randy S.
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 7:13:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"Randy S." <rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:D 96852$q1e$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
>
>> Well, I was only going by the information that I had, which was that
>> those first two airings were only 60 minutes.
>> Do you tend to believe info from usenet or info that you have first hand
>> knowledge of? That's all I was doing.
>>
>> Now I'll add that you really should be checking the To Do List once in a
>> while to make sure that you'll record what you expect to record.
>> Especially since you seem to think that missing a recording is that big
>> of a deal that you have to cry about it to the whole world on usenet. If
>> you'd bother to check the To Do List you could have changed something to
>> get the airing you expected. So I'll kindly remind you of what I said in
>> my first post -
>>
>> "So Ha! It was your own damn fault!"
>> The statement is still valid.

>
> Look, don't be an ass.

Why should you be the only one? You're pissing and moaning about things
I've never discussed.


> You were wrong, you went off half-cocked and threw around accusations that
> were incorrect,

I suggested that he must have added padding to his SP because mine recorded
as scheduled with a 60 min. duration. Is that what you are calling an
accusation?


> whether or not you had incorrect information to base it on. Jason's
> complaint was valid, and we know what you were referring to when you said
> it was his own fault, and it wasn't that he didn't check the to do list,
> don't try to revise history.

Why the hell do you think I'm trying to revise history? other than because
it suits the arguements you like to create. All I did was state another
reason for missing the expected recording that he could have prevented. The
statement that it was his own fault is still just as valid even though there
are other reasons to support it.


> Next thing you're going to tell us is that you never said there were WMD's
> in Iraq in the first place and that you wanted to invade to "free the
> people" as the primary objective the whole time.
>

That particular problem has what to do with the "30 Days" schedule?


> You still have a major problem of not being able to see beyond the end of
> you nose. Other people have valid concerns that may not exactly match
> yours.

When and where did I ever say anything to give you that idea. I've never
even addressed Jason's concern regarding networks and their new scheduling
scheme.


> I agree with Jason, these scheduling shenanigans that the networks are
> pulling are low and a pain in the ass.

SFW?

Since his concerns are valid, it's not his fault that he didn't get a
recording that he expected because he didn't bother to check the To Do List
on his Tivo. Oh, wait, that's right. His concern over scheduling is
another issue entirely and one that I haven't addressed. So why the hell
are you telling me about it as if I had disagreed with it?

Stop pulling this stuff out of your ass and posting it as if it actually has
any merit .
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 9:10:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

>>You were wrong, you went off half-cocked and threw around accusations that
>>were incorrect,
>
>
> I suggested that he must have added padding to his SP because mine recorded
> as scheduled with a 60 min. duration. Is that what you are calling an
> accusation?

Exactly, you accused him of causing the conflict by padding his
recording. He did not cause the conflict, nor pad his recording, it was
caused by exactly what he claimed caused it, a 1 minute overlap caused
by intentional scheduling by the network. 'Fess, up, you were wrong to
accuse him of causing it.

>>whether or not you had incorrect information to base it on. Jason's
>>complaint was valid, and we know what you were referring to when you said
>>it was his own fault, and it wasn't that he didn't check the to do list,
>>don't try to revise history.
>
>
> Why the hell do you think I'm trying to revise history? other than because
> it suits the arguements you like to create. All I did was state another
> reason for missing the expected recording that he could have prevented. The
> statement that it was his own fault is still just as valid even though there
> are other reasons to support it.

I'm not saying that it isn't a good idea to check the To-do list, but
scheduling conflicts like this cannot be solved by that and your
suggestion solves nothing, it only allows you to be prepared for it, and
make the decision as to which show to record (or go through some
needlessly complex manual recording setup that you shouldn't have to do
with a Tivo). Without the stupid 1 minute overlap there'd be no
problem, and what exactly does that extra minute gain anybody but a
headache?

Here's a question back at ya, what exactly does checking the to-do list
have to do with his complaint? Does it make it any less valid? Does it
solve the problem? How about asking Jason, does checking the to-do list
make him happy and solve the conflict problem? I bet we both know what
the answer is.

>>Next thing you're going to tell us is that you never said there were WMD's
>>in Iraq in the first place and that you wanted to invade to "free the
>>people" as the primary objective the whole time.
>>
>
>
> That particular problem has what to do with the "30 Days" schedule?
>

I was making a parallel, it's fairly obvious. GW's only stated
intention for starting the Iraq war was the existence of WMD's. Later
on, when that was shown to be false, he insisted that the *real* reason
for the invasion was to stop human rights abuses, never mind what he
said before. Can you see the similarities? Originally you said that
the conflict was Jason's fault for padding it. Now that you're
demonstratably wrong, you insist that you were *really* "suggesting"
that he check his "to-do" list and that therefore it was still his own
fault.

>
>>You still have a major problem of not being able to see beyond the end of
>>you nose. Other people have valid concerns that may not exactly match
>>yours.
>
>
> When and where did I ever say anything to give you that idea. I've never
> even addressed Jason's concern regarding networks and their new scheduling
> scheme.

No, actually you insisted it wasn't caused by that at all, but by
Jason's own actions. You didn't give Jason the respect that he was due,
nothing he said was incorrect, except maybe that he thought that the
guide was mistaken, and not scheduled that way on purpose.

>>I agree with Jason, these scheduling shenanigans that the networks are
>>pulling are low and a pain in the ass.
>
>
> SFW?
>
> Since his concerns are valid, it's not his fault that he didn't get a
> recording that he expected because he didn't bother to check the To Do List
> on his Tivo. Oh, wait, that's right. His concern over scheduling is
> another issue entirely and one that I haven't addressed. So why the hell
> are you telling me about it as if I had disagreed with it?

I never said you disagreed with it, but you certainly denied it even
existed, at least with regards to this show. Only after I posted the
actual times and durations of the shows did you admit that Jason's
observations were correct.

You should learn to give people the benefit of the doubt when they're
being reasonable, you jumped the gun at accusing Jason of being wrong
about the scheduling of the show.

Randy S.
June 20, 2005 11:09:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:13:26 -0500, Zardozz wrote:

>
>
>Why the hell do you think I'm trying to revise history? other than because
>it suits the arguements you like to create. All I did was state another
>reason for missing the expected recording that he could have prevented. The
>statement that it was his own fault is still just as valid even though there
>are other reasons to support it.

Zardoz, I was not shown a conflict screen when I scheduled the
6/15 recording. The conflict popped up when the network changed
the show's length and caused a fake-conflict.

Randy, save your breath. I doubt he's gonna admit his mistake.
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 12:42:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Jason wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:13:26 -0500, Zardozz wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Why the hell do you think I'm trying to revise history? other than because
>>it suits the arguements you like to create. All I did was state another
>>reason for missing the expected recording that he could have prevented. The
>>statement that it was his own fault is still just as valid even though there
>>are other reasons to support it.
>
>
> Zardoz, I was not shown a conflict screen when I scheduled the
> 6/15 recording. The conflict popped up when the network changed
> the show's length and caused a fake-conflict.
>
> Randy, save your breath. I doubt he's gonna admit his mistake.
>

I'm sure you're right. Interesting that they changed the duration to
1:01 rather than entering it that way in the first place. That only
makes things that much tougher!

Randy S.
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 9:49:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

<Jason> wrote in message news:s9ieb1lkc6qksauqnilrce53dtsiqb8o0p@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:13:26 -0500, Zardozz wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Why the hell do you think I'm trying to revise history? other than because
>>it suits the arguements you like to create. All I did was state another
>>reason for missing the expected recording that he could have prevented.
>>The
>>statement that it was his own fault is still just as valid even though
>>there
>>are other reasons to support it.
>
> Zardoz, I was not shown a conflict screen when I scheduled the
> 6/15 recording. The conflict popped up when the network changed
> the show's length and caused a fake-conflict.

Now the conflict wasn't real?

>
> Randy, save your breath. I doubt he's gonna admit his mistake.
>

Tell me what mistake I made?
It's obvious that FX is playing with the schedule which resulted in your
Tivo and my Tivo having different information. I never said yours was wrong
or that mine was right. I just posted the info and stated that it's the
info from my Tivo.
!