Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Daniel70 Newsgroups: rec.arts.drwho Subject: Re: Doctor Who Infinity Poll on the Timeless Child... Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 21:41:10 +1100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 72 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2024 11:41:13 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="438b557fa47ec9a3610980fba13b750a"; logging-data="1647335"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19hqSSfKpdpCpp0etfT6D0+8Kj5vuhkQKM=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.53.19 Cancel-Lock: sha1:60aJEFgBXQfhElGFpEYUQE+uoGI= In-Reply-To: Bytes: 3761 Blueshirt wrote on 4/12/24 9:37 pm: > The Last Doctor wrote: > >> Just to demonstrate that Dave was fishing in a small, selective >> pond with his last poll, I set one up in another Facebook community >> - but a more diverse one and one that has about 90,000 members. I >> also allowed for a range of nuanced thoughts rather than Dave's >> binary view of "you must retcon it or you're ant-Doctor Who". >> Engagement was fairly low (this is, after all, very old news now) >> but nevertheless ... >> >> Two days on, here is the position: >> >> What do you now feel about the Timeless Child narrative in Doctor >> Who? (583 votes total) >> >> It was a great addition to the lore, adding mystery and setting up >> opportunities for a whole lot of new stories. 37% (214) >> >> It could have been a great idea but it was presented poorly. 12% >> (64) >> >> We didn't need it but we've got it now so let's just move on. 23% >> (136) >> >> It was a bad idea. Let's try to forget it happened. 10% (53) >> >> It was an abomination and must be rewritten out of continuity >> (retconned). 15% (91) >> >> I don't care. 2% (9) >> >> Timeless Child? What was that again? 1% (6) >> >> >> Interestingly, almost 50% of voters LIKED at least the idea of the >> Timeless Child. with 37% being very positive. >> >> 25% were neutral. >> >> 25% were negative about it, but only 15% went so far as to demand a >> retcon. >> >> Very different than what the very predominantly "old school white >> male fan" pool of Ian Levine's followers believe to be the majority >> case. >> >> As an aside, in the comments, more people had negative things to >> say about the "bi-generation" of RTD, than about the Timeless >> Child, even though this poll never even mentioned it. > > From the people I interact with in fandom, either personally via > e-mail or on forums, DM's etc, they all had a BIG problem with the > bi-generation thing... it didn't go down well at all. As we've previously (Classic Who) seen a bi-combination Regeneration, I didn't see much of a problem with the Bi-generation thing!! > The Timless Child arc, a female 13th Doctor - or Missy even - were > generally not big issues for them at all. Nor should they have been. > So we tend to get a warped viewpoint here of what the 'issues' with > Doctor Who are because Dave and Agamemnon constantly bang on about > retconning the Timeless Child... it's rammed down our throats so much > on RADW that we are blinded by the other 'issues' some people in > fandom have with the show... issues that hardly get discussed here. > Yeap. Yeap. Yeap. -- Daniel