Are You A Softy?

Lofty Rides A Girl's Bike, originally uploaded by Dave Gorman.

We have some fancy Roberts D.A.B. radios to give away on my Absolute Radio show - not to mention a lot of softmints. A year's supply to be precise. Not that I think it's possible to be precise when measuring a year's supply of softmints... but then I don't think it's really worth quibbling with to be honest. The point is someone somewhere has tried to work out what a year's supply of mints is and it doesn't really matter what it is they came up because I promise you it's a lot of mints.

Anyway... we'll be giving away a radio - and some softmints - every week for a wee while and the person we give it to will simply be our favourite softy of the week.

You can interpret the word 'softy' any way you like. It might be a story about you being all romantic but it might just as well be a story of you backing down in the face of a bully. It's up to you.

Share your softy story with us via the show's website here - and if we read yours out, we'll send you a radio and the mints. Lots of them. Mints that is. It'll just be the one radio.

I, Claudius...

Nope.

Not Claudius.

I meant Player.

That's right. iPlayer.

Yep. You can watch episode one of Genius on the BBC's iPlayer. That's what I meant.

It's here: GENIUS




There's also a late(r) night repeat of the show on Saturday night: BBC2 at a quarter to midnight.

And of course, episode two will be on next Monday at 10pm.

Genius: Monday. 10pm. BBC2.

With Hazel Irvine & Hazel Irvine

I mean Russell Howard & Russell Howard

Sorry. I mean Russell Howard & Hazel Irvine. That's right.

Or do I mean Hazel Irvine & Russell Howard?

A Short Clip...

The first three ideas from a one-off feature in the first episode:

Using @bbcgenius on twitter and the Genius group on facebook encouraged loads more people to get in touch with loads more ideas. But nobody sent more than Pat Harkin. Which is why when he was in the audience we surprised him with this.

Incidentally, the silly Mastermind theme music that sings Pat's name... that was recorded by our producer Simon and researcher Dan without telling me. So if I look a little surprised by it... I was.

Have I mentioned that the series starts on Monday night? At 10pm. On BBC2.

Never once have we... oh, well, just this time

I apologise if this appears to be two posts in a row on a similar subject but... well, it's more a post about online manners than anything else.

I have a Flickr account. I use it to post photos. I like photography because it's a creative outlet that has nothing to do with how I make my living. It's just a hobby, no more no less.

Flickr allows people to comment on photos. Occasionally people use that facility to comment on other things. When that happens on my photos I delete the comments. I figure there are loads of ways of getting in touch with me so I keep my flickr pages kind of clean and on-topic: photography.

Today I found the attached comment on one of my photos. It wasn't a provocative photo... it was this one:
It's not a photo that offers an opinion about Christianity or faith. There were no other comments on the photo that related to Christianity or faith. It seems obvious to me that the comment is more than a little out of place.

It's especially ridiculous as at the time it was left the front page of my blog was hosting a really lovely and polite discussion on the nature of Christian Values with 30 to 40 comments and no flaming whatsoever. (Those are the numbers on the blog itself rather than on the facebook page that it's imported to)

I have no idea what he means with the opening sentence. I recognise all the words but they don't add up to a sentence with any understandable message. I'm sure other flickr users would be as confused as I am by the words, "I saw your sign on another fickr stream." Wha?

My favourite line in the comment is, "and never once have we ever shoved Christianity down anyone's throat"... which is just perfect in the middle of a post that seems to be doing exactly that.

Of course, having deleted it I was immediately accused of censoring him and of not being able to handle the truth etc etc etc. I engage in online discussion and debate freely and often. There are loads of ways people can get in touch with me. But there's a time and a place. A comment like this left on a photo like that makes the person leaving the comment the online equivalent of the maddo on the bus who sits down and starts talking to you about Jesus. (Or candy floss, or blisters or anything else for that matter) Deleting the comment - and blocking them - is really just moving to a different seat on the bus.




By the way... I don't want to start a discussion on the merits of his words. I'm just not that interested. I love that the post before this one yielded a polite discussion on a subject that almost always becomes inflamed - especially online. For what it's worth, he seems to me to be behaving in a way that will annoy people of every stripe. If you disagree with him that's obvious. But I think his oafish, shoving-things-down-people's-throats behaviour does a disservice to those who agree with his opinion also... because he just contributes to a negative stereotype that isn't helpful to anyone.

So if you want to leave a comment let's keep it on the subject of online manners rather than the subject raised by the man who had none.

Oh... and I've blurred out his ID so as to avoid anyone seeking him out on flickr. It's not worth it.

Values...

Nottingham Contemporary (Flipped & Stitched), originally uploaded by Dave Gorman.

I can see no point in adding a great deal to the noise surrounding the Pope's UK visit. The same debate is being held everywhere else already anyway. (Though I would say that this Guardian piece is a very reasonable take on the Nazi red-herring that was unfortunately introduced to the debate)

But I do want to ask a genuine question about the phrase Christian Values. I'm not asking because I know the answer. It's a genuine question.

The thing is, when someone defines Christian Values to me they always sound to me to be lovely values. But they also seem to be values that aren't exclusively Christian. Indeed they seem to be values that are shared by pretty much every other faith. And by people without faith too.

But when someone talks about, say, British Values, they normally mean "values that are particularly British"... in other words, values you wouldn't normally expect to find in other nations.

When someone says, "I expect the fans of this club to give the manager time because that's how they do things here, those are the values of this football club," the implication is that these aren't the values at most other football clubs.

So, when people say, Christian Values, do they mean values that are peculiar to Christians. And if so, what are they?

Because, well, because they seem to me to be just, well, Human Values. Am I wrong? I'm not asking about the way in which anyone arrives at a belief. That seems far less important to me than the end result. (Although I know which route I prefer). I'm talking about the beliefs themselves.

[I will monitor comments. If it gets a bit flamey, I'll shut it down. That's really not what I'm trying to achieve here. It's a genuine question. Are there values only held by Christians, values only attainable through faith?]

Some Ideas...

Some of the ideas submitted by video.

When one's finished, you can click on one of the reels and find another idea lurking in the Genius Generator there as well. I liked the toilet paper pants myself. I'd not seen that one before.