Himesh defends SMS Voting !!!! - Page 7

Originally posted by: chatbuster

in any case- wat wld u rather have- public involvement or judges, financial support and name-recognition for the contestants or a prestigious trophy handed by a judge most folks cant identify with, gathering dust. to suggest some kind of a split is compromising on either of these two admitted extremes. somewhat like a lowest common denominator at play. we cld then have someone win the competition who neither shone with the public nor with the judges, but just because his mathematical total was the highest.

also Qwerts, u might BELIEVE the public is all messed up. but we DO KNOW that the mentors/ judges were messed up- we saw that with them not even being able to agree during the initial round selections where they were all acting in cahoots. if selecting best singer was such a mathematically straight process, shldnt they have had more unanimous decisions?

Saregama before has given us Shreya Ghosal... She had won based on the merit of her singing by esteemed musical judges.. Was her selection wrong???

Sunidhi Chauhan had been selected of a musical program as well..again by esteemd musical judges ..was their selection wrong??

Kunal Ganjawala was noticed from saregama show..was his selection a mistake???

When we say a panel of neutral judges we don't mean the mentors.. Not everyone can be as unbiased as Ismail Durbar as we saw in C2005.. he complimented other singers and also gave them points based on what they sang.. sometimes this affected his own gharana contestants. but you are right.. there is always a possibility of these mentors overhyping and being biased to their own gharana contestants..

Revenue also is important..We are in the land of democracy.. have 45% public opinion , single voting and the voting lines open for just 3 or 4 hours on the day of the performance and then seal it.

Select a neutral panel of judges and let them vote on the performance of the day . 45% of the final result should be of the judges decision and 10% based on mentors points.Stop mentors from giving anypoints publiclyl.They can give point but that should not be shown to the general public..like a secret ballot.

Now decide on the result based on public input as well as judges and the mentors input.😛

Originally posted by: live_life

did he say anything against debu? no. instead he said the result was perfect which means he appreciated that debo won and not whine.

He did not whine??? Are you sure?? if I were you I would watch those episodes after the walk-out atleast once !!!

I wouls also suggest you watch the Kolkata show , the delhi show as well.😊

Originally posted by: adi_0112

Can we also call this as arrogance and super duper ego problem to follow someone else's direction???

Are you trying to imply Asha tai is not creative or self confident individual and is only there to earn her means of living???Because when ARR directs ..she follows direction..isn't that what a professional should do???

In the film world we have some very young directors- KJ , AC, FA etc.. does this mean senior actors ( they are definitely senior to call the shots!!!) like AB, should not act under their direction.. because they are juniors?? what logic is this????😕

Adi.. again comparing apples to oranges

The singers will not have a problem listening to what the MD says. The actors will not have a problem listening to what the director says. Because they have their separate, defined positions, and they know direction and music direction should be left to the people who know best.

But here we are talking about someone who is already an MD. If he is given directions by another MD, he might not necessarily agree. That's where the problem will arise. Similarly, if someone tries to direct Karah Johar in a movie, Karan won't simply roll over and do what the director says - he will raise his own points too. So basically an MD singing for an MD will not be a very good idea. That's what HR means.

Originally posted by: adi_0112

Agar Bhaskar bhai dekh nahi raha hota (mujhe unhe dukhi karna nahi hain)then just for this comment alone..i would have gone....😡.. but unka sunday evening barbad..karneka irada nahi hain.. to isiliye mein chhord raha hoon... fir kabhi kisi aur jagah..iska jawab dunga..rain check !!!

aaj ke liye itna hi kaafi hain..ki I disagree !!!

😆 (yeh Bhaskar bhai ke liye..) dekho hum haas rahe hain..qwerty ka yeh comment dekh ke bhi..😕😆

Adi.. querty is right.. Amit ji is doing this primarily for money, and he has admitted as such.

When his movie 'Waqt' came out last year, he was asked what had made him choose to do the movie, and he replied, 'Pet ka sawaal hai'. He is honest, and I admire him for being honest.

At the age of 60, and with a generation full of superstardom behind him, he has not come out of retirement to challenge new boys like the Khans. He has come out because he needs to make money - same reason he's been doing KBC. Of course, there are a couple of movies he does take on for creative satisfaction, but the majority is for the $$.

Originally posted by: shadyhtown

I normally don't agree with CB, but here I have to. The analogies raised by Adi over SMS decisions during educational or medical decisions is totally off topic and baseless. Those are important issues related to national interest, which need to be dealt with by experts. While this show, honestly, is just a form of entertainment. Zee TV is an entertainment channel.

Yes, over the past so many years they focused on music and provided real music to the people, but if Subhash Chandra now wants to attract in a larger audience and make some money in order to keep his channel afloat, I don't blame him. This is a cut-throat world, and Adi, you being someone who works in the corporate world should understand the business side of it.

Who said no to that?? Off course subhas Chandra has a right to attract people to gain revenue.. but to base a decision completely on what public say??? That is unfathomable for me..

Originally posted by: shadyhtown

SMS voting is not just for the financial income. That is important, but not the only thing. It attracts people. It makes them feel they are a part of it. It makes them feel important, makes them feel they should watch the show every week, because if they don't they will be responsible for their favorite participant being eliminated. It's a great feeling of being part of the decision-making. Sponsors were there earlier too, but the TRPs weren't.

People being involed involved in decision making and feeling important and being responsible.. nice words Shady..

but where was this sense of being involved , responsible during the Tsunami or the earth quake or any such national calamity??? aren't those good enough causes to be involved?? If speNding 1000's of rupees per week is acceptable to the masses.. then why is that in the same country there are atleast 100 who go without food per day.. a person can spend RS 20 on SMS voting but if a rickshawala asks for Rs.5 extra.. there is a big confrontation!!! A coolie demand Rs.20 extra, the people get offended... why is that???

A cancer research soceity sends out request for donation.. maybe a couple of people respond.. but to a musical show...1000's of rupees is spent by individuals..why is that?? aren't these causes important enough?

The orphanages/blind schools run on such small budgets.. how many individual has felt the need to contribute there?? aren't those causes good enough to be involved in or feel responsible for???

Originally posted by: adi_0112

Saregama before has given us Shreya Ghosal... She had won based on the merit of her singing by esteemed musical judges.. Was her selection wrong???

Sunidhi Chauhan had been selected of a musical program as well..again by esteemd musical judges ..was their selection wrong??

Kunal Ganjawala was noticed from saregama show..was his selection a mistake???

When we say a panel of neutral judges we don't mean the mentors.. Not everyone can be as unbiased as Ismail Durbar as we saw in C2005.. he complimented other singers and also gave them points based on what they sang.. sometimes this affected his own gharana contestants. but you are right.. there is always a possibility of these mentors overhyping and being biased to their own gharana contestants..

Revenue also is important..We are in the land of democracy.. have 45% public opinion , single voting and the voting lines open for just 3 or 4 hours on the day of the performance and then seal it.

Select a neutral panel of judges and let them vote on the performance of the day . 45% of the final result should be of the judges decision and 10% based on mentors points.Stop mentors from giving anypoints publiclyl.They can give point but that should not be shown to the general public..like a secret ballot.

Now decide on the result based on public input as well as judges and the mentors input.😛

yaar, we will always have exceptions. it's like someone can be dumb and still succeed. but what are the odds? to have had 4 or 5 or even 20 singers from the old sgmp over a span of over 10 years are pretty dismal numbers. in less than a year, we've had 20 singers from the new public process getting more name recognition.

as for the rest of it, seems to me like bureaucratic fine-tuning. usually starts like that and goes down-hill from there.

as another example, consider how fair the veto process has been. to some, it wld seem fair, to others simply a whimsical process. yaar, let's not ascribe magical qualities to these judges and make-believe that they someow have the fingers on "universal best".

as for ID, not sure i buy into your comments- he might have wanted to seem impartial for reasons best known to him, but correct decision-maker he did not seem to me when handing out notes etc to other contestants😛

lots more things to look at other than impartiality. someone can be impartial in their own minds yet have it totally wrong. someone can be technically smart, but a total zero when it comes to interviewing/ evaluating others. if anything, i've seen most of the guni-judges act very whimsical.

Shady- how abt making it a point to be more agreeable?😆

Originally posted by: shadyhtown

Adi.. querty is right.. Amit ji is doing this primarily for money, and he has admitted as such.

When his movie 'Waqt' came out last year, he was asked what had made him choose to do the movie, and he replied, 'Pet ka sawaal hai'. He is honest, and I admire him for being honest.

At the age of 60, and with a generation full of superstardom behind him, he has not come out of retirement to challenge new boys like the Khans. He has come out because he needs to make money - same reason he's been doing KBC. Of course, there are a couple of movies he does take on for creative satisfaction, but the majority is for the $$.

Till date I have not seen any interview of Mr.Amitabh bacchan where he says he is too superior to act for any newcomer.

And Shady Mr.Amitabh Bacchan may have had bad spells.. but he is also the man who have for us a "Black" in recent times.. he is a senior actor ,a thespian who has reached unparrallel heights ..by his work not by his declarations.If not anything I feel he requires a little bit of respect..

The interview of Himesh Reshamiya reeks of arrogance and attitude ..which I am glad to say is lacking in others..

After that its one's own choice and perspective.

Originally posted by: adi_0112

Who said no to that?? Off course subhas Chandra has a right to attract people to gain revenue.. but to base a decision completely on what public say??? That is unfathomable for me..

I wish, and I'm sure he wishes too, that he could attract people simply by continuing the previous format, but it hasn't seemed to have worked. So that's why, after years of sticking with one format, and end up having to see new shows like II and FG superceed SRGMP, he's had to make some hard decisions.

But maybe he could use the judges/people combined ranking system that I mentioned. That way both sides are happy, and the income also comes in.

People being involed involved in decision making and feeling important and being responsible.. nice words Shady..

but where was this sense of being involved , responsible during the Tsunami or the earth quake or any such national calamity??? aren't those good enough causes to be involved?? If speNding 1000's of rupees per week is acceptable to the masses.. then why is that in the same country there are atleast 100 who go without food per day.. a person can spend RS 20 on SMS voting but if a rickshawala asks for Rs.5 extra.. there is a big confrontation!!! A coolie demand Rs.20 extra, the people get offended... why is that???

A cancer research soceity sends out request for donation.. maybe a couple of people respond.. but to a musical show...1000's of rupees is spent by individuals..why is that?? aren't these causes important enough?

The orphanages/blind schools run on such small budgets.. how many individual has felt the need to contribute there?? aren't those causes good enough to be involved in or feel responsible for???

Totally agree. There are much more important things in life than SMS voting. But I guess that's human nature. People care more for their own entertainment than for others' suffering. Sad, but true. Neither you, nor I, nor Subhash Chandra, not the stopping of SMS voting, can do much about the people's nature.

If stopping people from spending on SMS meant they would spend more on the humanitarian causes, I would be the first to support that.

Originally posted by: Akon_Jeezy

ye to hai😆

X-Rebel ji - Settings main yeh pics block karne Ka Upay to bataiye. 😉 Hum to yeh pictures dekh dekh kar pagal ho gaye hain. 😕

Originally posted by: adi_0112

Who said no to that?? Off course subhas Chandra has a right to attract people to gain revenue.. but to base a decision completely on what public say??? That is unfathomable for me..

People being involed involved in decision making and feeling important and being responsible.. nice words Shady..

but where was this sense of being involved , responsible during the Tsunami or the earth quake or any such national calamity??? aren't those good enough causes to be involved?? If speNding 1000's of rupees per week is acceptable to the masses.. then why is that in the same country there are atleast 100 who go without food per day.. a person can spend RS 20 on SMS voting but if a rickshawala asks for Rs.5 extra.. there is a big confrontation!!! A coolie demand Rs.20 extra, the people get offended... why is that???

A cancer research soceity sends out request for donation.. maybe a couple of people respond.. but to a musical show...1000's of rupees is spent by individuals..why is that?? aren't these causes important enough?

The orphanages/blind schools run on such small budgets.. how many individual has felt the need to contribute there?? aren't those causes good enough to be involved in or feel responsible for???

what is unfathomable about subhash chandra's decision? shldnt he be in it to make money like other biz? in this case, everyone's interests converge, making it a win-win for most folks- the show is more popular, the singers are getting more recognition, the public is getting more involved in an active sense.

incidentally, does he have an obligation to provide entertainment that meets with the sophisticated needs of the minority guni-folks around. or does he have an obligation to the millions of shareholders/ workers in his company? what wld u do, Adi. wld u take a pay-cut to satisy the nebulous needs of some folks?😉

if we still dont buy into all this, toh ab aise karte hain. let's also have some movie experts judge movies and select them for us. after all, the public cannot be trusted to make intelligent, culturally-sound choices. hai na? or better still. let's use a formula to make those objective choices for us.😉

as for the rest of it, folks are free to spend their money how they like, arent they? or shld we also start regulating things like that? i think its best to leave social conscience issues to the self, methinks. next thing we'll be griping about how folks spend money on cars, flats, accessories, clothes. no?😛