Get rid of Biedny

[Seth]

Dave,

It is good that you're aware of your critics. Remember you are a critic to other people, and they have the same response you are having now. Criticism is a good thing! Use it to hone your skills in delivery and understanding as you use it to create honesty and forward thinking in others.

I've personally been promoting your show, because of your critical analysis and logical intellectual approach. Nowhere else can you get such stricture. Don't second-guess yourself or your abilities stay true to the integrity of the show! Godspeed (if one exists)! More Biedney!

Seth

 

[fitzbew88]

Keep everything like it is.

My socks, however, are indifferent.

 

[BrandonD]

Seriously, I'm curious as to how I stand with our audience.

dB

You and Gene are a good combination. It wouldn't be the same with either one of you by himself, you guys are like a reflection of the two sides of every paranormal fan.

 

[pixelsmith]

i vote more. david is one of my favorite people.

 

[Chuckleberryfinn]

I think that the response here is a good indication, Mr. Biedny, that listeners for the most part enjoy your contribution to the show. Whoever the mean grumps are that have been bothering you are a minority voice. The problem is probably with those few complainers themselves rather than anything you do on the show. I'm actually mystified as to why you and Mr. Steinberg haven't been picked up by several radio stations by now.

If y'all went head to head with C2C (same time-slot, different radio stations), you could take over their audience base in probably a year or two, with the proper ad campaign to help.

 

[CapnG]

It ain't broke...

 

[Poi]

I voted to leave it as it stands because I couldn't vote for more of the two of you.

No one is going to like everyone and a lot of people don't like anyone. Let 'em get their own show and put up with gripers just like themselves. It's just rude to drop by and say ugly things. I mean, who does that anyway? Children wholly invested in themselves, that's who.

You guys play off each others very well. Don't screw up a good thing.

 

[Ron Collins]

As a host, I think you are wonderful. I do wish you would have a cup of decaf and 30 minutes of Chi centering before responding to some posts though.

I think you are exceptional at asking good questions of your guests. Nothing against Gene, I think he does a good job too but you have more of the take no BS answer attitude. I hope that doesn’t offend Gene. I would really like to hear either of you really hammer some of the guests. The ones that are clearly shit peddlers need to be called on the carpet so to speak. There is just way too much of that out there and in my opinion it needs to be exposed much more harshly than it is.

It's no secret that I am more comfortable with the "Nuts & Bolts" theories but DB is a constant reminder that there are other points of view. I think that it is a good dynamic. It allows me to explore how I feel about these ideas and I think it is still handled with a high level of objectivity.

However, If I had just one complaint about DB and the show it would be the injection of personal politics in the show. It is not that I have wildly different views than David. Its just that this is not the reason I listen to the show. I do honestly think he should do a political rant podcast that is solely a platform for these topics. ( I do not mean "rant" in a bad way, more of the Dennis Miller sort of way.) I would prbably tune in and listen to it to be honest. But it is not why I listen to the paracst. Of course when your guest is Ritzman or Dolan it is pretty much the topic at hand and in these shows it is what I expect to hear. But, just like I hate to hear Bono, Sean Penn, or Toby Keith use their respective entertainment venues to promote their politics I would rather hear things that pertain to the subject matter.

(Gees, I hope I'm not going to make everyone on this forum hate me for having said this. Its just my honest opinion.)

 

[dorkbot]

I voted to keep the format the same. I love the fact that Gene seems to have the history to relate stuff from the early days. "I met Charles Fort once. Nice man." Just kidding. I love the fact that Biedny is genuinely passionate and confrontational about the subject. I think you both work well together and compliment each other conversationally.

Not that you asked directly but I have some suggestions that would improve the show for me. I offer the following suggestions based on having listened to all but a few of your shows over the past couple years.

My central concern is that you have quality guests and that you make the absolute most of the two hours you have with them. To that end I would respectfully submit the folowing:

1. I don't mind if politics are discussed but I dislike hearing the same extended rants over and over. It's not because I disagree with your politics necessarily but because I want to hear all the information the guest can possibly pack into the timeslot and I feel the rants don't advance this cause. If the guest wants to rant, let them to a reasonable degree.

2. I've frequently noticed a tendency to start an echo chamber between the hosts and guest that I would characterize as a group whining session about the "mainstream media." Large amounts of airtime have been burnt complaining about how the media doesn't take the subject seriously, etc. I think it is probably pretty safe to say that 99% of the audience already agrees with this. Unless the guest has specifically studied the matter of media suppression please don't burn airtime on the subject. The Paracast is two hours of "our" time where the subject IS taken seriously and I feel it should be directly concerned with examining the subject matter at hand and not complaining about how other people don't take it seriously.

3. I've also noticed that frequently the discussions veer away from what the guest thinks about a given matter and turns into the hosts repeatedly going over their own theories and then asking if the guest agrees. This is a bit trickier because there has to actually be a dialog in a good interview but in general I would like to avoid lots of airtime being spent on re-examining the hosts' theories and focus on the guest's. I'm not saying the hosts shouldn't talk about their own views at all I'm just suggesting that the proper format for extended discussion of such is a show with just Gene and David. I enjoy those shows very much. When there is a guest try to maximize the available airtime with critical examination of the guest.

4. I would like to see some standard interview questions designed to advance the collective ongoing discussion of the subject asked of each guest. I want to know what the guest believes they can say with certainty about their particular subject. I love hearing theories but at some point I want the guest to backed into a corner and asked things like:

- Tell us what you believe or have the highest degree of confidence in. What specific case or idea would you be willing to argue before a hypothetically impartial jury and what specific pieces of evidence would you present to make this case? If it is hard data, fine. If it is personal experience, fine. If it is anecdotal or hearsay, fine. Just make sure the show doesn't end without them letting us know on what case or idea their confidence is highest.

-What specific ideas or theories do you feel are 100% mistaken?

-What specific actions do you believe are needed to advance the study of your particular subject?

I would like to come away from listening to a show feeling I learned something new even if it is only that this guest has the highest confidence in X and feels that Y and Z need to be done to advance their field of study. The overall point I'm trying to make is that I feel the goal of the hosts should be to try and extract every last bit of information from the guest that they possibly can in the time alloted.

I hope this will be received as constructive criticism aimed at genuinely improving the show as an information source.

 

[urkotic]

I started listening to The Paracast in I think late December. At first I couldn't tell the two hosts apart. After awhile I started thinking of Gene as the guy with the smooth radio voice and David as the guy who 'goes off on a rant' periodically. Also as the guy who seems to get some sort of residuals for Network DVD sales (and yes I was motivated to check Network out of the library and watch it).

I really like the show. Maybe once it crossed my mind, should David Biedny tone it down, reign it in, maybe grind the same axes less frequently or for shorter intervals, but... again... I like the show. There's something about the mellow host and the (periodically) barbed host that really works for me. So my vote would be stay as is.

All in all I am a big admirer of the show, look forward to new podcasts, and have actually recommended it to several people since I started listening. Maybe I am just anti-change but I don't think you should tamper with the chemistry at this point. It's good.

And a perhaps unrelated note... in my sampling of podcasts, there's no doubt this one has the best sound - no annoying fuzz or big problems with levels between host and guests (other than Mac Tonnies seems like a chronic low voice mumbler, which is too bad since what he says is quite interesting).

 

[Seth]

I would really like to hear either of you really hammer some of the guests. The ones that are clearly shit peddlers need to be called on the carpet so to speak. There is just way too much of that out there and in my opinion it needs to be exposed much more harshly than it is.

Agreed. The time has come for reason and intellectual-logical investigation. It is far past time to expose frauds and charlatans.

 

[Goody]

Arseholes.

Mr Biedny you're not going anywhere.

I voted for keep it as it is. If people do not like the sound of your voice or the content you present, too bad; go somewhere else where you'll be alot less informed, the home of C2C where you will not only get brainwashed with loads of B.S you'll also end up a sick and paranoid little person.

I say bring on more Biedny, there's nothing wrong with you buddy .

Goody.

 

[Goody]

Btw, exuse the language

 

[lotusland]

First off, I haven't listened to EVERY paracast as I'm a newbie, but I have been diligently making my way through the shows.

I really, really like the show a lot. Intelligent, insightful questions from hosts who know the topics and the players. Very refreshing.

If I were to make a suggestion, it would be this: a little less mentioning of the "I am an imaging expert" stuff. I can only recall one interview where this wasn't mentioned (with Imara). Honestly, it starts to sound pompous when you hear it over and over again at length. It's enough that it's stated on your bio on the site. Those who are not devotees of the site will soon learn of your legendary imaging prowess.

One thing that could be done if people feel one or both hosts talk too much is to time the actual amount of time they speak relative to the guests. That could be a very revealing exercise. Sometimes it does feel that the hosts ramble on far longer than necessary, with the guest left hanging on the line awaiting their turn. It seemed that way during the Bruce Maccabee interview; the guest could hardly get a word in at times, but perhaps that's my distorted perception?

It's all a learning curve and take the feedback for what is: an effort to make the show the best and most amazing offering of its kind anywhere. In my mind, it is already that.

Thank you Gene and David for all the work you do. Critics and devotees alike adore you (even if they won't openly admit it).

 

[Brian Now]

I vote keep it as is.

I mean this really is "The David Biedny Show" anyway, you just call it "The Paracast" because it's sexier....not that you're unsexy, I bet you're really...aw nevermind.

 

[Goody]

Davids far too modest to call himself sexy, so thanks Brian for doing it for him.

 

[DBTrek]

I don't mind DB on the show . . .

. . . but can we vote him off the forums?

























(That's a joke folks, everyone relax)

 

[Alea]

dB is definitely very sexy and I voted for MORE Biedny...but I'm prejudiced.

 

[Jose Collado]

I don't mind DB on the show . . .

. . . but can we vote him off the forums?



(That's a joke folks, everyone relax)

LOL

 

[cottonzway]

It's pretty overwhelming that people either want it to stay the same or for David to speak more. I voted for more as I like listening to David because even when I don't agree with him he is brutally honest and that is very rare now. No reason for less and by no means no reason for David to go. Anyone who feels otherwise should just not listen to the show and take their bitching elsewhere.