I don't own a telly.
I usually use the net, or if I have to watch anything use iplayer or some plug in to watch a particular episode or I buy DVDs. As you can probably imagine I don't have a TV licence for the simple reason I don't need one (and the additional reason I quite like my money being mine rather than the TV licensing people's).
That does not stop them sending quite threatening letters to my address warning me of fines, jail terms and destitution. If I actually paid attention to their warning letters with their scary red text blazing across the top, I would probably be fearing some kind of deportation to a TV licence avoiders penal colony island somewhere.
Part of me thinks maybe if I call them and tell them I dont have a TV they will stop. But then I think hang on, surely the onus is on them to find out if I have a TV or not?. I mean no one else sends threatening random bills out when there is nothing to pay for, why the hell should I do their work for them?
And the other part of me thinks just let them come. What are they going to do? Are they going to kick my door down? Without a warrant? How come with all their threats of sophisticated vans, detectors and army of fascist jackbooted licence collectors they still address me as "The occupier" and don't mention my name? If they come, they come. Its going to be a smaller scale repeat of looking for WMDs in Iraq.
Still I don't like the threatening, bullying tone of the letters. They seem scaremongering and the sort of thing that loansharks would do rather than a branch of government.
The Cabin In The Woods
3 weeks ago
5 comments:
2 things RLJ.
1. If you watch anything live, you need a license.
2. TV Licensing or any company related to TV Licensing has nothing to do with any branch of government.
Oh, I hope you get caught.
Ouch. I would ring them to say you haven't got a tv- yes you shouldn't have too, but you can get the moral highground by doing it and it might stop them sending you stuff. And the anonymous poster has a point, if you watch anything live (e.g. if it's live on iplayer) then you need a license- but i'm guessing you don't watch it live, you just stream it after it's been on tv.
We get mean 'occupier' letters too... and we have a license.
DSP- Yeah, I usually watch it by streaming it afterwards. I have since had people contact me and say they get threatening letters too so its not irritating me as much now.
Anon - Cheers for clearing up the non-governmental element. Shame you are anonymous though, I do like to flatter myself that my detractors have a certain amount of backbone, and could handle identifying themselves.
.....says the girl who is completely anonymous, doesn't disclose who she is, apart from the fact that she didn't have the talent/academic nouse/ability to quite get on the course she coverted so much....oh, and remind me, slags people off, colleagues/course members/friends and random people she doesn't know from the easy and comfortable confines of her laptop.
I found the last anonymous commentator's comments particularly odious and spiteful.
There are plenty of people that do not get onto clinical psychology courses. They are talented, have academic ability etc, but because of the bottleneck cannot get a place. RLJ was a strong candidate as, judging by her sobriquet, she was on a reserve list (or two). Evidently, someone somewhere thought she would make a good clinical psychologist. I think the fact that good people like her eventually move onto better thnigs is my profession's loss more than anything.
Anonymity has little to do with this. No one with any sense would post their real name or details on the net. However, an unwillingness to use a pseudo-anonymous identity to stand behind a comment is nothing other than cowardice.
All that is left to be inferred is that you are one of RLJs legion of criticised, and you are by your actions proving her point. I did not agree with RLJs actions at the time, but am now starting to see what she was talking about...
Post a Comment