bkkguy

in a thread here I was challenged to support my assertion that "most" posters here do not like the style in the bangkokbois blog at https://bangkokbois.wordpress.com/ - cast your vote here and prove me wrong! bkkguy

actually I don't think it shows anything at all about my respect for "gaythaiand", and if you want to try to estimate my level of respect for some of the posters here I really don't think you need to go to bankbois' web site to do so! and do you question the validity of the observation about the likes and dislikes of some of the posters here re bangkokbois? or do you just find stating the obvious offensive or disloyal for some reason? given I have made many more comments about posters and their opinions than I have about the standard of moderation here and the "jibe" quoted was about poster's opinions I don't understand how "some" would come to that conclusion! and in posting the link here I was hoping that at least some here may actually rise above prevailing opinion and go and read the item and enjoy it, and indeed some did - "That's a clever piece of writing! I enjoyed it." was the response from someone here, I would have to scroll back to remind myself who it was... but to get back on topic at no point in his email to Andrew Sullivan did Anderson Cooper say his coming out was related to being bullied into doing so - perhaps you and Ms Keller are just using the same license you accuse others of using and "twisting it to [your] own point of view"? bkkguy

so the discussion had died, you re-opened it with selective quotes from a news item, I countered with selective quotes from the same item, you countered you were not trying to re-start the discussion but were just quoting from a news story, I countered that selective quoting is trying to continue or influence the discussion - which you now seem to agree with, so there is even less poiint in continuing this meta-discussion about disscussions! bkkguy

for an alternative take on this: Out This Week: The Keeping Them Honest Edition I know most of you here hate bangkokbois' style but for those who are not beyond a bit of well-written parody, enjoy! bkkguy

of course one does not need to directly "comment" to express an opinion or continue a discussion - as media moguls and news editors have always know, selective quoting of sources is an effective tool to influence a discussion while appearing to remain "neutral" and "balanced" - but I am not in any way trying to imply that the choice of paragraphs you selected to quote here where influenced by your own personal opinions and were an attempt to influence the opinions of others who may or may not have read the full original source or the various other reports on this issue recently - butter does not melt in my warmest orifices either! bkkguy

we can both quote selectively from this article and truevisions has already addressed the issues of signal leakage beyond Thailand's borders, but the terrestrial channels and other satellite broadcasters have not - which is conveniently ignored in most of these reports! yes - name me one other country in the world that requires satellite/cable services to re-broadcast free-to-air transmissions while allowing these channels to sign contracts prohibiting re-broadcast but as you keep claiming that most of these issues are "beyond you" then there is little point in continuing this discussion! bkkguy

I have an iPad2 16GB Wi-Fi only, I got it to see how much I would hate Apple's "walled garden" and having to use iTunes for everthing and it had a few apps that were only on the iPad at that time and yes I hate the "walled garden" but in reality for day-to-day usage it does not make that much difference, on my Android devices I have never bothered installing alternative boot-loaders etc but I have installed a few critical apps from other sources yes I hate iTunes but with iOS 5 it is no longer such an issue most of the iPad specific apps I no longer use or are now available on Android of the significant apps I use - Evernote, pulse, Kindle, Flipboard, various bank and finance apps, newspaper digital editions etc - panel size and resolution is more the issue for me than OS! it is not that I don't like the iPad - I use it all the time - but there is very little that attracts me and ties me specifically to iOS, but as the iPad is my current largest screen device I use it all the time at home but would be just as happy or probably happier with an Android tablet of the same size, and find the Note or a similer device easier to carry when I go out what attracts me to Android? on a trivial level, live wallpapers - they are fun; live widgets - they are useful and convenient ways of keeping up-to-date without having to start an app; google account integration - I sold my soul to google years ago and it is my main repository for contacts and diary etc and this integrates seemlessly with all my Android (and to some extent iOS) mobile devices and my Win7 desktop mail and calendar apps (OK Apple has mobileMe (sorry for laughing) and now iCloud - but I don't have a Mac) and apps I buy in the google market etc and as I transfer from Android phone to new Android phone it is really painless for most people I talk to I say if you are already in the Apple ecosystem stay there, if you are already in the google ecosystem stay there, if you are undecided then look at at hardware costs and decide! bkkguy

I am surprised to see a legit, new Note for 13,500 - where did you see? I was also surprised to see AIS offering Serenade members 1,000 Baht off the new Galaxy S III on official launch date, so miracles do happen! I have had the Note since release in Thailand, about 6 months - as a phone it is too big to use comfortably every day, as a tablet it is a bit too small, but as a phablet (are we allowed to call it that here? some people seem to object strenuously to the term) it is a great compromise, even more so now that Samsung has rolled out the ICS (with TouchWiz) upgrade! my main phone now is the Galaxy S III and I love it as a smartphone and all the things I want to do with a smartphone - it is a good size and feels good in the hand, it is a great large screen and easy to read with my failing eyesight, I can do quick google searches and google translate for sms, quickly check email, sync conatcts and diary with my other devices and lots more but my voice account is with AIS and their 3G network sucks, true's 3g network is great but I don't want to transfer voice to them, so I use an AIS SIM with minimal 3g in my S III and a true 3g SIM in my Note and do more "web" access on my Note when I am out and about often when I travel I will get a local voice/data SIM in the Note and keep the AIS SIM roaming for voice only in the S III the Note screen is only slightly larger - but it handles the Bangkok Post and The Economist digital editions slightly better and news aggregators like pulse and Flipboard slightly better, Kindle for book reading is about the same on both devices, general browser use is also fairly similar the stylus was one of the features I thought would be interesting on the Note, but I don't end up using it that much but have seen some other very creative uses for the stylus battery life I find disappointing on the Note - but perhaps I leave too many things running in the background. I have been very happy with the battery life on the S III. I find the Note also tends to get a bit hot at times - again maybe because of my usage patterns I also have an iPad2 which I usually could not be bothered taking out each day - the Note is much easier to carry - but use extensively at home. The larger screen size is great for games, BK Post/Economist digital edition and even Flipboard and Kindle eventually I think I will replace the Note and the iPad with a single 8-10" tablet device - iOS or Android as they say in most of the reviews - your milage may vary! bkkguy

the Ministry regularly blocks public proxy servers as they become more popular, it rarely blocks VPN services why? "Government Complex Commemorating His Majesty the Kings 80th Birthday" is the current name of the building they are located in - buildings and roads celebrating specific events are not usually re-named every year, it would cause a lot of confusion! bkkguy

it should also be noted that if we are not going to continue this debate forever then someone has to stop responding to points sometime - I just beat you to it! bkkguy

and there are even more interesting articles in the Bangkok Post today: CPB hopes for 'favour' from Uefa in footie row and the Nation Today: Grammy seeks renegotiation with Uefa UEFA contract change urged on blackouts DSI may get involved in dispute over Euro matches but yes, let us not prolong this thread much further - let us leave it to others to follow the story as it evolves and form their own conclusion! I am sure if I were to comment on things that were beyond you I would just get banned again! bkkguy

but it does result in a legal problem in Thailand, and that is the real issue here! The games are being broadcast on free-to-air Channel 3 - and Thai people expect that if they can receive the Channel 3 signal they should be able to watch the games. Now if you hook up a regular aerial that can receive the Channel 3 signal you can watch the games, if you hook up a GMM box that can receive the Channel 3 signal you can watch the games, if you hook up a TrueVisions box that can receive the Channel 3 signal you can't watch the games! Why? TrueVisions is legally required to re-broadcast the Channel 3 signal so why can't you watch? Because the contracts signed by GMM, UEFA and Channel 3 do not allow re-broadcast! so TrueVisions is in an impossible situation - they can show the games and get dragged through the courts by GMM and UEFA for re-broadcasting material that do not have permission to re-broadcast, or they can not show the games and get dragged through the courts by their customers and have the government take their license away for not re-broadcasting material they are legally required to re-broadcast the government obviously recognises this is an impossible situation because, while publicly castigating TrueVisions and making threats about how this may impact their license renewal, it is in the background rushing to finalise new rules about what satellite service providers do and do not have to re-broadcast, what content deals free-to-air channels can enter into and what types of content viewers using satellite re-broadcast should expect to pay extra for! I find it hard to believe that a company like GMM did not understand the legal implications of the contracts it had signed, but as soon as it became an issue they then went public with statemets like "We paid for the rights, TrueVisions wants them for free" and "TrueVisions is using legal loopholes to hold thier customers to ransom" - the sheeple fell for it, bleated their venom at TrueVisions and canceled their subscriptions and flocked to buy GMM boxes. Somebody is pulling the wool over somebody's eyes here - but it is certainly not TrueVisions! you can go off on whatever tangents you want about whether they should have out-bid GMM for the rights at the start, or whether they are abusing their monopoly position with the content, packaging and pricing decisions they make but I doubt you will find a satellite/cable service anywhere that does not face constant complaints from its subscribers about such issues. Personally I couldn't care less if they never showed any sport or Acadamy Fantasia - but that gets into personal opinions and preferences and is not related to the legal issue here but if you want to see GMM come out ahead in this issue, then as the Thai's would say "up to you" bkkguy

yes the free market worked perfectly when GMM out-bin TrueVisions - but that is not the problem, the problem only came about when GMM did deals with the free-to-air channels! yes, as I understand it GMM initially did offer to license the matches to TrueVisions - and if TrueVisions wanted to show the matches on its own sports channels with its own packaging and promotion and advertising and even pay-per-view pricing then yes they would need to negotiate a price with GMM to do so, but TrueVisions rejected GMM's terms, as it has the right to do the critical issue is the "legal necessity" - TrueVisions is legally required to re-broadcast the free-to-air channels content. I find it hard to believe that GMM and the free-to-air channels did not understand the legal implications of this when they signed deals not allowing re-broadcast but either way a legally impossible has been created - not by TrueVisions yet they are the ones being castigated for this! but in most other countries where there is a requirement for satellite/cable suppliers to re-broadcast free-to-air channels there is a legal framework in place that defines exactly what must be re-broadcast, what type of deals the free-to-air channels can negotiate and when consumers can expect to pay extra to receive the "re-broadcast" of some content on satellite/cable services indeed while the NBTC is publicly castigating TrueVisions they are in the background drawing up exactly such a framework! this is Thailand so any talk of stable doors and horses bolting is a waste of time! yes they could have out-bid GMM or licensed the content from them but it probably was not commercially viable (and the very reason GMM went to deals with the free-to-air channels was because they were not going to make enough out of sales of their own set-top boxes!), but GMM and the free-to-air channels and the government are the ones who have created this situation - TrueVisions' only fault is their lack of response! as soon as the contracts were signed TrueVisions should have been in court seeking injunctions to atop them, they should have been petitioning the NBTC to resolve the issues, they should not have been leaving GMM to claim the moral high ground with such dubious claims as "we have paid for this, why should we give to True for free?" GMM’s contract with UEFA allows "broadcast" on terrestrial free-to-air channels but does not allow "re-broadcast", hence GMM's contract with the terrestrial free-to-air channels says the games cannot be "re-broadcast" the government's contract with TrueVisions says they must "re-broadcast" the free-to-air channel content this is not rocket science - who is responsible for the problem here? TrueVisions? I will beg to differ and I can't agree that "True deserves to be in the shit" - as I said above their major fault was allowing this to turn into a PR/customer/legal disaster for them. The NBTC is now making veiled threats about remembering this incident when licenses come up for renewal - and if TrueVisions suffers more then GMM then this is another example of when this falung will never understand "Thai ways"

GMM and its parent Grammy have been legally trying to compete with True in satellite services for years - it is not the government that is stopping them from overtaking TrueVisions in the market! and there are a number of other players in the satellite and now the IPTV market have a look at GMM's set-top box and compare it with TrueVisions' standard and HD boxes and make your own decision. Have a look at GMM's web site and try to understand what programs and channel packages they offer at what prices and compare that to the information on TrueVisions' web site and make your own choice! GMM greatly improved their chances of success when they recently moved from using a C-band satellite to a KU-band satellite thus allowing them to use the same dishes as TrueVisions GMM greatly improved their chances of success when they out-bid TrueVisions for Euro 2012 and then put their set-top boxes in 7-11, PowerBuy and everywhere else however not being able to sell enough set-top boxes they took their contract with UEFA that did not allow re-broadcast and made deals with the free-to-air channels that did not allow re-broadcast - yet TrueVisions is legally obligated to re-broadcast free-to-air transmissions! all innocent - butter would not melt it its warmest orifice - GMM claim they have paid good money for these rights, why should they give them to TrueVisions for free, and everyone drinks the Kool-Aid and cancels their TrueVisions subscription and buys a GMM box all innocent - butter would not melt it its warmest orifice either - the NBTC tells TrueVision they must transmit the games but completely avoids the issue of how. But according to the Nation today NBTC is in the background busy trying to draw up a legal framework to define what satellite providers must re-broadcast, what deals channels can make with content providers and what satellite viewers must expect to pay extra for on re-broadcast channels. everyone seems quite happy to cast TrueVisions as the villian in the piece here, but the Nation today is the first I have seen that is game enough to say that TrueVisions viewers are being held hostage - and like them I think the only good thing that will come out of this is the legal framework will be clarified and this type of situation will not arise again!

in the whole time that UBC and TrueVisions have been operating not one content provider that supplies programs to the free-to-air channels has ever tried to charge UBC/TrueVisions an additional license fee for fullfilling its government contractual obligation to re-transmit the free-to-air channels as part of its satelite/cable service so now GMM negotiates a flawed contract for the football, wants to milk as much money out of it as it can and wants to get market share for its new settop box. Not content with the license fees it has got from the free-to-air channels it wants to screw its competitor TrueVision and its subscribers and demands an additional fee this places TrueVision in an impossible situation - it can fullfil its contractual obligation and re-transmit the games and get sued by GMM, it can block the games and the government can potentially take away its license to operate because it has not fulfilled its contractual obligation, or it can cave in and pay the fee to GMM and leave itself vunerable to unlimited excessive demands for license fees from every other content provider because GMM has now shown they can get away with this when the games are not available to TrueVision subscribers the government says TrueVision must supply them (but refuses to tell GMM to alow this and refuses to comment on whether fees should be paid for this), the consumer rights bodies tell TrueVision subscribers to make claims against TrueVision, TrueVision customers claim TrueVision is hopeless and they will cancel their subscription and buy a GMM settop box GMM is the one who has engineered this situation in the name of "free market competition", and GMM is the one who is trying to screw TrueVision and its subsbribers, and GMM is the one who does not want to see this issue resolved, but everyone seems to think it is up to TrueVisions to fix a problem they did not create I am no TrueVisions fanboi but mark me up as one falung who will never understand "Thai ways"! I can "understand" wanting to maximise profits but there is such a thing as unacceptable business practices - but let the "free market" (LOL) decide, and in Thailand that seems to favour GMM! where did you read this - because the only report I saw in the Bangkok Post was the NBTC ordering TrueVisions to supply the content to its subscribers! and that competitor should be GMM? GMM is the one who forced TrueVisions to be "in a bucket of shit. They have broken their contract with their 2 million subscribers and laid themselves open not merely to complaints to the relevant regulatory bodies, but also to law suits for breach of those contracts." bkkguy

like the home pregnancy test this test is not targeting people "most at risk", it is targeting those who want or need results outside the system for whatever, perhaps spurious, reasons - and they will always find the money for the test! to be fair the panel only "recommended" approval - though the FDA usually follows the recomendations of it's expert panels - and the panel and most commentators have expressed reservaions about the accuracy of the test compared to other methods one of the classic uses of the test I think will be those who want to "know" that their anonymous pickup for the night is "safe" before proceeding to perhaps "unsafe" sex - so given the inability of most of the population to correctly understand the concepts of risk and statistics; and to correctly interpret statements like "the 20-minute test is 93% accurate for positive results"; and even to understand the time lag between being infected, being infectious and returning a positive result; I would beg to differ with the expert opinion that "its potential to prevent infections outweighs the risk of false results." bkkguy

perhaps Thaiticketmajor had heard that some people that like high-camp ballet "come with a lot of baggage"? bkkguy

I know business do not grow unless owners dream but given the limited number of brands (as distinct from gay venues that currently advertise in Out) that seem to be willing to advertise in magazines distributed here in traditional distribution channels that really target "professional" (cough cough - let's not say "gay") men I am again curious what type of brands represented by the 221 ad agencies you realistically expect to attract to a magazine with an unudited circulation of 8-10,000 copies a month distributed mainly through small gay venues in a handful of locations in Thailand! how many pages in your latest edition? your content to advertising ratio is already quite high - if this new staff menber gets his 70,000 Baht per month that is 10-12 new ads per month = 120-144 new ads per year = 30-144 new pages each month after 12 months depending on whether the advertisers want 1/4, 1/2 or full page ads - I assume you have plans to increase content to support this "limitless" advertising expansion? I've tried but they don't seem to take me seriously! bkkguy

two Thai guys I know are media buyers at advertising agencies in Bangkok buying ad space for small to large local and international brands in the local media - they don't earn half of what you are offering, perhaps they are on the wrong side of the transaction :-) you are a free magazine in a limited vertical market, most of your current advertisers are small local businesses - what is your current circulation? what is your current advertising revenue? how much do you realistically expect this to grow in the next 12 months? what brands represented by the "221 advertising agencies in Bkk" do you realistically expect to be interested in advertising in your magazine? how much "extra" advertising space do you expect to have availabe for this new guy to sell this year and what percentage of that does he have to sell to make the 70,000 Baht? obviousy there is no reason why you should provide this information in a public forum rather than in a job interview but if you are going to make statements like that I think you might have a bit of a credibility problem if you expect to attract anyone with experience in or knowledge of the local ad market which is perhaps why you have not been able to fill this "very attractive" position bkkguy

"An official authorization appended to a passport, permitting entry into and travel within a particular country or region" is I think a reasonable starting point for discussion here The fact that the Thai government has set up a bureaucratic procedure that requires a certain type of visa in your passport before they can do an extension of permission to stay for certain reasons but they are willing to oil the wheels of bureaucracy by issuing this visa even after you have entered the country is much less disturbing and threatening to my understanding of what a "visa" is than your suggestion above that because a permission to stay in also stamped on a passport page it is also a "visa"! Many countries stamp entry and exit dates on your passport - do you want to call these "visas" now as well? bkkguy

every time? I am surprised, because sometimes when I enter Thailand I have a visa and sometimes I am entering on a Re-Entry permit and if I have a visa I enter that number and if I have a re-entry permit I enter that number what is so special about you that they will only let you into Thailand with a re-entry permit rather than a visa? exactly, I think this is a problem but it is not my responsibility - perhaps you should be discussing this with the designer of the form or the government department that issues the form, I can give you their number if you want it! apart from bad form design I have not seen you post any evidence that the Immigration Police or the Interior Ministry or even the Foreign Ministry consider the Re-Entry Permit to be a visa! bkkguy

this is an example of a visa issued by the Royal Thai Government note that it clearly states the visa type, the date you have to enter the kingdom by, and how many entries you can make on this visa - because a visa is about permission to enter Thailand. the permission to stay you get when you enter Thailand is determined by the visa type. the form to apply for this is called "Application for Visa" this is an example of an extension of permission to stay issued by the Royal Thai Government note that it does not say it is a visa anywhere, it does not mention the date you have to enter the kingdom by, and how many entries you can make because it is not a visa - a visa is about permission to enter Thailand, this is a permission to stay so it indicates when you have to leave the country, a totally different concept. The form to apply for this is called "Application for Extension of Temporary Stay in the Kingdom" this is an example of a re-entry permit issued by the Royal Thai Government note that it does not say it is a visa anywhere, it is a re-entry permit and can only be applied for when you do not have a current visa but do have a current permission to stay and wish to leave the kingdom and re-enter. The permission to stay granted on re-entry is not related to a visa type because this is not a visa, it is determined by the permission to stay you had when you applied for the permit - again a totally different concept. The form to apply for this is called "Application for Re-Entry Permit into the Kingdom" I am not the one making this up - this is the terminology and concepts used by the Royal Thai Government I've shown you mine GB, you show me yours - was the stamp you cropped the word "RETIREMENT" out of a visa or an extension of permission to stay? Actually I am quite happy with the Royal Thai Government's concept of visa, permission to stay and re-entry permit and the forms you need to use - you are the one that seems to think you have to right to re-define what a retirement visa is so I suggest you have the discussion with either the Foreign Ministry or the Interior Ministry because they are the ones you need to convince - not me! yes I guess you don't - try using that permission to stay stamp as a visa to gain entry to the country and see how far you get! bkkguy

curious as to why you said this when you really wanted to apply for "a retirement visa thinking the Tourist visa was already issued and stamped in my passport" again curious - what form did you fill out for the Non-Immigration "O" visa and what form for the retirement visa? life is very different in Bangkok where the Immigration Police do not have a form that you can fill in to apply for a retirement visa - they do however have a form TM86 to allow you to change an existing visa (eg a Tourist Visa) to a Non-IMM O Visa or a TM87 to apply for a Non-IMM O visa in Thailand (or elsewhere) and a form TM7 to allow you to apply for an extension of permission to stay for reasons of retirement and of course the consulates and embassies overseas have the option to issue a Non-IMM O-A retirement visa but this has significantly different requirements and benefits from the Non-IMM O visa - not necessarily well understood by the "experts" in Pattaya and certainly not available from the Immigration Police in Thailand! while I would expect the documents required to support a visa application or extension of permission to stay may differ in Immigration Police offices in Pattaya and in Bangkok I am surprised that there appears to be different classes of visa available in Pattaya and different forms available to apply for them! Again I am surprised that life in Pattaya is so different because in Bangkok not only do the Immigration Police not issue retirement visas they don't issue re-entry visas either! there are only a small number of visa classes that can be issued by consulates and embassies under the Foreign Ministry there are even fewer visa classes that can be issued by Immigration Police Offices under the Interior Ministry, and they can also issues permissions to stay and re-entry permits there are only a limited number of forms that can be filled out to apply for visas, extensions of stay or re-entry this is not rocket science - why do most people find it so hard to post usable verifiable information here? bkkguy

Wikipedia's protest is not about copyright, it is about control of piracy - many organisations and individuals support the basic concept of copyright and IP protection but do not support restrictive DRM systems that limit basic "fair use" rights and legislation like SOPA/PIPA that seek to bypass due process of law and threaten the the viability of a free international Internet just to satisfy the whims of a few powerful media conglomerates the storm in a teacup after I questioned a poster's right to post here what could reasonably be assumed to be copyright images without approval of the copyright holder shows that many posters here do not understand even the basics of copyright let alone the more controversial issues involved with copyright and piracy these days though interestingly if SOPA/PIPA was passed it would make it easier for e-commerce sites whose copyrighted images where posted here to have this site blocked - something Scoobie may wish to consider! you want to debate copyright and piracy, lets look at some of the real issues - the amount of material that would now be in the public domain if not for the continual extension of the time period that copyright applies - the original justification for copyright and how the current copyright laws are producing exactly the opposite effect - the people who copyright was supposed to support and who now benefits most from copyright - the implications of SOPA/PIPA in the USA and internationally - why a few powerful media companies are allowed to have such a huge influence on the passage of laws in the USA and elsewhere though it is interesting to see so many US senators that originally supported these bills are now running scared http://arstechnica.c...s-in-senate.ars bkkguy

I replied with a quote from "Copyright Basics" published by the US Copyright Office, p3 http://www.copyright...ircs/circ01.pdf and your response is which part of the US Copyright Office document do you not understand? where are you getting the concept of needing "intent" before copyright applies? bkkguy