Paresh Rawal - the best guest - Page 17

Originally posted by: chatbuster

ab baat to woh nahi hai na- we'll again keep backtracking?

Jaya, pls go and read all the previous things... bahut agey nikal aye hain. just dont want to deal with one person pulling the leg, another the arm, different folks coming out of the woodwork when all has been said and done, each trying to rewind and play forward from a convenient point. there is a certain history for where i am at, if u dont get it, pls read back...

there is nothing i've really said that shld have been the subject of so much debate. in classy/ refined circles, one does try to express things positively. when we keep quiet abt certain matters, we may be occasionally seen as implicitly criticizing. i have gained from positive aspects in my upbringing and so i stick with these values, in sharp contrast to some who i think will have one set of standards for the contestants but wld not want to hear the slightest criticism themselves if they were at the receiving end. paresh ne kisi aur ko bola, toh woh saint. humei bolta, toh we wld have been on his case. no?

i was definitely not speaking from that angle.. everyone should be open and matured enough to take criticism.. and in the long run, it only helps.. one just needs to know how to take it in the positive manner... and even in the classy/refined circles.. kabhi kabhi daante ki zaroorat hoti hai na.. warna yeh pataa chala ki paani sar ke upar chad gaya... isnt Vinit a very good example of the same... khair.. I will not want you to be diverted from the tussle between you/Shady here.. keep it going... hum log kabhi aur, kisi aur baat pe bahas kar lenge...

Originally posted by: shadyhtown

You surely are confused. On one point you mention court, and right after that you imply that defense of someone is an admission of guilt. If this was a real court, all accused would go to jail without trial. Because if they try to defend themselves, it's an admission of guilt, and they go to jail. And if they don't defend themselves, they still go to jail anyway. Either way it's jail for them. How wierd does that sound? 😕

Also, don't you read my posts fully? I've replied to this, saying that I never said Paresh's didn't give negative feedback. He did. My argument was only started by your 'blunt' argument, and I was defending Paresh by saying his feedback was not blunt. That's all!

So shall we move away from the negative feedback deal, and move on to the bluntness or insensitivity issue? Please?

And if we do have live effects, please explain to the court. We've always had live effects, but the debate is still going. If you want to prove your point, describe it. The court doesn't just look at the evidence and rule. The lawyer needs to explain and describe it. If he doesn't, the other lawyer wins, because he gave in his evidence.

LOL. again the first half of the "confused" post can be tossed away. why? because the folks were not defending him for not having negative feedback. they were defending the appropriateness of the negative feedback they did perceive. when so many folks saw/ felt that as negative (as also agreed in the recap), who am i to disagree?😛

in other words, they must have thought that he had negative feedback to give, else why argue that it was appropriate? they shld have simply said he did not have negative feedback.

in any case, u now seem to agree like the rest of the folks that he gave negative feedback. chalo, der aye. at least we have that open admission now 😛...

as for your other qns. will deal with them tomorrow. gnite

Originally posted by: shadyhtown

Debate.. Buster is effectively busted

Originally posted by: chatbuster

LOL. again the first half of the "confused" post can be tossed away. why? because the folks were not defending him for not having negative feedback. they were defending the appropriateness of the negative feedback they did perceive. when so many folks saw/ felt that as negative (as also agreed in the recap), who am i to disagree?😛

in other words, they must have thought that he had negative feedback to give, else why argue that it was appropriate? they shld have simply said he did not have negative feedback.

in any case, u now seem to agree like the rest of the folks that he gave negative feedback. chalo, der aye. at least we have that open admission now 😛...

as for your other qns. will deal with them tomorrow. gnite

Okay let's make it simple here.. I don't know what the other folks felt or did.. I joined later.. it's not necessary that everyone supporting Paresh has to be in one group..

My issue with you is only on the bluntness or toning down of the comments, as you mentioned. I don't really want to know who was defending the appropriateness of his feedback or why. I only want an answer from you - how would you tone down Paresh's comments and/or body language to be appropriate?

Ek simple sawaal kiya, uska jawab bhi aapke paas nahi hai.. jab tayyar jaaye to bol dena. Until then, it's useless divcerting to other topics like who defended his actionsand why.

Originally posted by: punjini

CB you are not being fair. Why should the transcripts be thrown out? Agreed that it is only a partial depiction of reality, since the video will give the complete picture. But the words spoken are the entire crux of the judgment/opinion expressed by Paresh Rawal.

I went back and read some of the pages again. People said Paresh did the right thing by being honest, not "sugar coating his words" etc. You said "if one is unable to offer an honest appraisal because it might be too harsh, one might want to tone it down. such things are in any case perhaps best left for private, same as a job appraisal interview."

Now, looking at the transcript as well as the video, how do you think Paresh should have toned it down?

will answer that.

but first look at my points for why people insist on videotaped/ live testimony. just think why!!! they're not fools, or are they? sorry, that is why the written stuff does not come into play.

btw, i knew we wld want to backtrack. we usually do😉 finished the 24 hour work?😛

gnite

Originally posted by: soulsoup

That was not a comment with a debating spirit Shady!

Sorry Anolda.. let me tone that down to sound less 'blunt'..

Accha nahi laga... (and let me assure you, my body language is very positive here) 😛

Originally posted by: shadyhtown

Debate.. Buster is effectively busted

LOL

ab assessments aise hain toh i can see why some people kept buying into the dot-com bubble😉 J/K

LOL

Originally posted by: chatbuster

will answer that.

but first look at my points for why people insist on videotaped/ live testimony. just think why!!! they're not fools, or are they? sorry, that is why the written stuff does not come into play.

btw, i knew we wld want to backtrack. we usually do😉 finished the 24 hour work?😛

gnite

CB.. videotaped evidence is already there.. I am viewing it..

URL Not Available

But as you know, videotaped evidence is not enough.. we also need explanation and argument from the lawyer to support the evidence.. that is what I am asking for..

Originally posted by: shadyhtown

CB.. videotaped evidence is already there.. I am viewing it..

URL Not Available

But as you know, videotaped evidence is not enough.. we also need explanation and argument from the lawyer to support the evidence.. that is what I am asking for..

what will the lawyer say?

now what can he say my friends? just that u are so "guni" in these matters, so much more so than he can ever be. u've seen and heard everything, u've already decided and agreed his feedback was negative. we now even have his other advocate friend saying the feedback was negative. ab mia-biwi raazi, toh kya karega qazi? kyoon friends?

chalo, this particular courtroom saga seems to have turned out like a damp squib. much ado as usual about nothing.

so we are back to analyzing the appropriateness of negative feedback in public, all that late high-noon drama notwitstanding. in that regard, how does this sound:

"nautanki achi lagi but somehow negative feedback mei utna maza nahi aaya"

sounds bad doesn't it? makes him look pretty useless and dumb no? why, what's the problem now? well, problem is i am being very non-specific. but no more so than he was. in fact, his statements were desi confetti of "roxx" and "suc*s" for the most part.

as for the rest of my statements on negative feedback, forget even harsh. when we bring on a CELEB judge, there is something called "precedence" or established norms in society/ in court cases. when we have generally had CELEBS be positive, the random CELEB who comes on sounding even the slightest bit negative can set a very harsh tone for the unlucky recipient. it's like singling some singer out in full public view. u can say that they have the right to do so. well, a boss has the right to hold u up in front of other employees too. ur folks have the right to twist ur ears in front of ur peers. question is, should they.

in any case, who knows what satyavaadi image some CELEB is trying to create with the public? self-marketing kar liya, criticize bhee kar liya, and get the public to clap as well. seems to have worked- we have someone saying how "impressed they are with his honesty". this is where the obligations part comes in. the guy is under no obligation to do right by the contestant. in fact, the major obligation is to themselves, to be perceived as a great guy, to the show, to the producer who is giving them valuable air-time. the music reviewer is even more adversarial in terms of their obligations- they are expresssly beholden to their editor, to their rag, to selling their piece. it's not even to the show.

btw, now imagine a similar statement made about hema/ vinit/ debo. we would then forget honesty is the best policy in a hurry and be sticking it into paresh or whoever for being the slightest bit negative. arre, logon se toh 8 or 9 stars bhee hema/ vinit ke liye jhela nahee gaya- mentors like ID were being chided for bias against hema, certain supporters were upset with the 9 stars that vinit got in some episode. we would then say two hoots to the "logon ka conscience", what right did someone have to be critical?

yahaan toh we have someone like Rajeev being made to look as if he does not belong there. arre kyoon bhai? gunijan like paresh and some others here think like that, is that why? paresh is echoing what some of us feel, so it is right? what if he was being honest as usual in his own mind, but the target was your favorite? wld u still be standing up for paresh?

my other points/ examples on negative feedback in public, especially in this context, stand. try a different tack with the fellow-workers/ bosses/ workers, at least emote more positively so that folks will not perceive the negativity. will get more out from them. yes, there are random people for whom the danda works best.lemme know if that's the case here.

lemme now leave with the punch line. paresh- 1 positive even if u go by the transcript, 1 negative. contrast that with my pg 1 posting. 2 positives, one mild negative. woh bhee bardasht naee hua? in this case, set off such a fire storm of filmi-ishtyle ishaaras, heavy samajhdari-wala dialogues, and various references to "debators"? LOL