Each Doctor’s Strengths and Weaknesses

Some time back I ran into a forum that was debating which incarnation of the Doctor was the most powerful and who would beat the rest. While I had little interest in that, I was amused by the fact that a some seemed to be very assured that the newest Doctors were the best because of their age. I can only agree on that in the sense of they have worse writing and can do less probable things as a result.

For my part, while the Doctors are all the same person at their core, I always felt like each had their own skills, specialities and insights that help them stand apart. That’s why when different incarnations meet they can actually help one another, otherwise if they can all do the exact same stuff team ups would be totally pointless.

So I wanted to see what the general consensus on each Doctor’s abilities was.

The 3rd, 4th and 7th always seemed the most powerful and in control to me.
The 5th Doctor would presumably lose at everything.

iank wrote:The 3rd, 4th and 7th always seemed the most powerful and in control to me.
The 5th Doctor would presumably lose at everything.

You actually point out another thing that lead me to ask this. Despite being an older incarnation, 5 often seem to be regarded as one of the lesser Doctors. That implies not each successive regeneration is superior to the last. Even with their collective experience.

Tom Baker's Doctors strengths were when he'd had a boot up the arse and was actually acting he was quite probably the very best one out of the lot, but his weaknesses were, when he wasn't and inserting a load of self-indulgent pratfalling arsery in the writers scripts instead he was a complete and utter cunt.

If we're talking in universe I see it as this.

The Hartnell Doctor was a jack of all trades, master of none type character. He had such a long life and access via his time machine to the greatest experts of all time, so he could potentially become a master in so many different fields.

However due to his short attention span and constant desire to move on, he never became a master in any field, just skilled in each one.

For instance he is a skilled fighter, who took lesson from John L Sullivan, and probably Bruce Lee as well, but he never became the absolute best because during the middle of his fighting lessons he probably got bored and went to learn all about chess instead, where again he learned some tricks from the best, before getting bored, and going on to learn all about astrophysics.

As a result, the later Doctors who are all merely different aspects of Hartnell will have all of these skills, but they will be more prominent in others.

Troughton for instance is a skilled manipulator, because he has to be. He is tiny, weak physically, so his fighting skills are useless to him. Pertwee and Tom meanwhile are huge guys, so they use their fighting skills more often.

From a real world perspective I'd say it goes like this.

Hartnell best as being unpredictable and professorial, but when he tried to be too proud it could be cringey like the "HE MUST BE STOPPED" from The Time Meddler.

Troughton, best at being a warm, caring father figure like in Tomb and at bringing comedy into it. Sometimes however he'd go too far with the comedy.

Pertwee, best at being angry, authoratitive, and seeming like he was in control of a situation. However he could not do pain acting. Watch any scene where he is being tortured, and you'll laugh like in the Mind of Evil.

Tom, best at being alien, giving the Doctor a more complex persona, but as Rob says he could very self indulgent at times.

Peter, brought the character back down from Tom's caricatured version, and gave him some vulnerability. (I chalk his lack of confidence up to the Doctor's trauma over his mistakes as Tom, like failing to kill the Daleks, and what the Master did in Logopolis. That would clearly make him doubt himself.)

Peter however wasn't as naturally eccentric as the others and so he felt a bit blander at times.

Colin meanwhile was the best at showing us a more aggressive Doctor who wasn't afraid to get his hands dirty, but sometimes his overacting could be terrible. I personally think his performance in Twin Dilemma is awful, and I say that as a huge fan of Colin. "THE CRUSHING BOREDOM OF ETERNITY HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE"

Finally McCoy was the best at being manipulative, even over Troughton. McCoy however could not do anger. Well not over anger. Watch the bit where he shouts at Light, its really cringey.

Overall I don't think any of the classic era Doctors were miscast. They were all objectively as good as each other, but they all had their problems as all actors do.

Hartnell,

I tend to think of as having more weaknesses than strengths. He had the frailties of age, and by design he was not originally meant to be the hero of the show. That was meant to be Ian. Hartnell's Doctor was typically not interested in being the hero. Only in surviving and protecting Susan.

But he tended to have the wisest idea of what was to be done, and is usually shown to be proven right when his companions think against his advice, they can do their idea of the right thing to change history, and it blows up in their faces. He also had a formiddably ruthless intellect.

In a sense though, his era was less about seeing the Doctor in action, and more about seeing an anti-hero gradually *become* the Doctor we know. By the end of The Daleks' Masterplan, there's no doubt anymore that he is now the crusader for justice we know.

Troughton.

Much more committed to fighting the forces of evil, and with more experience of how Daleks and Cybermen think and how to fight them best. Retains Hartnell's ruthless intellect and in many ways amplifies it (ruthless in a way that sometimes made him closer to an Al-Qaeda terrorist when concerning the Daleks). He had more persuasive skills to influence others to realize the need to do the necessary thing.

I really can't think of notable weaknesses he might've had, aside from his fallible moment of overconfidence in Evil of the Daleks when bragging to the Emperor that he has sowed rebellion, only to be told the Daleks had been manipulating him all along to help them discover their own nature. And maybe in Enemy of the World he was a bit too late to be convinced of Salamander's true evil nature.

It has been pointed out that the ratings of his era were in something of a freefall. I don't think this was Trougton's fault, or the fault of the writers. I would venture that possibly there was a burnout of interest that Troughton sadly inherited. There might also have been parental concerns the show was getting too frightening for their children after the death of Katarina and Sara Kingdom.

Pertwee.

A few weaknesses stand out for me with this incarnation. Namely that he was unfortunately the first to set the template for the Doctor having moments of being an insufferable pacifist do-gooder (particularly concerning the Master), and he could be a bit of a head-patting fuddy-duddy in general. He also lacked the temperament for being an effective diplomat.

I think he brought a lot of urgency to the role at the beginning, but as his Doctor-Master rivalry continued, he seemed to become a bit too cozy and even easily gullible in the presence of his enemy playing the obvious 'reformed man' act. Frontier in Space particularly so.

Strengths were that he generally was still the smartest man in the room with the wisest approach. He took no shit and always maintained an air of dignity and pragmatism. He had a winning humor, twinkle and charisma without ever sending up the part.

Tom Baker.

In some ways he combined all the best elements of the Doctors before him. The physicality of Jon, the ruthless intellect and pragmatism of Troughton, and furious conviction of Hartnell.

Sometimes he did have his moments of absent-minded negligence however. Planet of Evil and Revenge of the Cybermen particularly come to mind (in the time it took him to walk to a dying Warner, he could've explained via radio how to save him via the transmat). But for the most part when he left an adventure, there was a sense that world had been immensely better for his presence than not.

For those three years with Hinchcliffe in charge, Tom's Doctor had been perfectly in his element. Then with the stormy sea-change to Williams, suddenly he wasn't quite in synch. I don't agree with the suggestion that he stopped caring, but it was more like the horse bolted, and he kept wanting to do his own thing based on what he was convinced would reflect the Doctor's eccentricity and entertain the kids, and was perhaps growing disillusioned with how the makers were taking the show. But often he really needed someone to clamp down on him a bit and make him commit to the script and tone at hand.

Even as late as City of Death though, he could still be a Doctor you wanted to be with all the way, and there was still something magical and life-affirming about his company and his approach. I think if there was a point I started to dislike him as the Doctor it was probably Nightmare of Eden. There are some moments there where he's downright punchable.

Unfortunately, however I cannot excuse any of the idiocy, ineptitude and incompetence he finally displayed in Logopolis. And worse is that it pretty much ended his era by undoing huge chunks of his good planet-saving work over his era. Sometimes I try not to count it as part of his era (it barely feels like a Tom story to begin with). But for the purposes of this discussion it is a bloody blow to his track record.

Davison.

To be fair to Davison, he did bring a lot of heart and commitment to the show, and for his first six stories it did seem like he was going to be a winner of a Doctor, and just the change the show needed. Contrary to fan opinion I think it should've been easy for the audience to take to him after Tom Baker. If anything the audience should've been rooting for him to avenge his predecessor from the start, and in Castrovalva he did.

Unfortunately that victory was inexplicably undone by Time-Flight and remained so for the rest of his era. And that was the problem I think with the rest of his era. It was easy to get behind Davison's preoccupation with small-stake concerns in Kinda and Black Orchid, so long as he believed the Master was vanquished. After he realized otherwise in Time-Flight, but didn't seem to care (or indeed seemed contractually obliged not to), it became a lot harder to emotionally invest

Sadly I think Davison was stagnated by the obsessive focus on continuity that seemed to require him to just imitate a more sanctimonious version of Pertwee, rather than giving him a chance to discover his own Doctor. Unfortunately I think he was a tragic case of an unfit for purpose production team, reimagining the Doctor in their own clueless, incompetent image. It was as if certain superfans who were calling the shots would rather the show remain faithful to the Doctor's stupidest stances in the past than allow him to grow wiser.

By Tom Baker's second season, had the show come to a stop there, Tom would've still felt like he'd enjoyed a solid, complete era. By Davison's second season he still felt half-formed, and a bit rote. And worse, he just felt like a sanctimonious do-gooder fuddy duddy. In short, all the worst, stupidest things the audience believe the Doctor to be.

But as poor a run as Season 20 was, there was still a chance for him to pull his socks up in Season 21 and redeem his crown. Unfortunately he did the opposite. A lot of fans say he had more authority in that season. But the problem is that's largely because he spends much of Season 21 being an avatar for Ian Levine.

I'll just say for now that Warriors of the Deep was the worst, most unforgivable exhibition of non-stop criminal negligence by any Doctor (only Orphan 55 comes even close). At that point I just hated his Doctor, and I very easily needn't have done.

It was especially sad, because often it would only have taken a few rewrites more (or in the case of Warriors of the Deep, a few rewrites less) to salvage his character's credibility.

By Resurrection of the Daleks it didn't even feel like his show anymore, and I have to say that's why I lost heart and didn't see the point in all the gratuitous nastiness in search of a tacked on moral virtue signal at the end. Caves of Androzani was sadly a taunting proof of his greater potential and what could've been if he'd started on that note rather than ended on it.

But for the most part, I think he almost erased any sense of character or nuance, or even common sense the character ever had. He was not a Doctor I would've trusted an inch with my life, and the fact his companions did just exposed the soulless artifice of the era for me. And even that artifice might've not been a problem if the era didn't take itself so seriously.

Colin Baker.

I've said before that there was a bit too much fan-influence on the show by this point, particularly from Ian Levine. But Colin was actually a fan with a few good ideas for returning the Doctor to his darker roots (though that probably wouldn't have even been necessary if we'd skipped Davison altogether).

I thought Twin Dilemma did the idea stupidly and obnoxiously, but a toned-down, more careful version of it might've worked. And I have to say by the end of Season 22 I was becoming genuinely intrigued by this Doctor and where they were going with it.

Sadly Grade put paid to that.

McCoy.

I feel they handled his character unbelievably clumsily in Season 24. His badass moments felt unconvincing and only seemed to work against the villains by children's pantomime logic. There also felt very little that was intelligent or alien about his Doctor that season.

By Season 25 he was becoming a formiddable figure again, and it felt like we were getting an overdue correction at last of the Davison era. Finally the Doctor felt like a maverick again, who was actually written by maverick writers.

That said it is enormously hard to ignore his atrocious beginnings, or for that matter, to feel like the rest of his era is manically over-praised in over-compensation. I'll just say I'm glad we got what we did from his Doctor. I'm not a McCoy fan, but I suspect his era was one more season away from fully winning me over as one.

McGann.

He did not get a good start in the TV Movie. Even watching at the age of 14 I felt the weaknesses of his portrayal was that the whole thing was just a chase film, and he seemed to just spend it running away. There never seemed a point where he proved his credentials by standing his ground as the Doctor, he just seemed to get completely humiliated and it was a bit unpleasant to watch. (One of RTD's shrewder points was that the problem with the film was that this wasn't really a story where the Doctor arrives to save the day. If he'd not landed on Earth it wouldn't have been in danger in the first place).

Fortunately the audios have rectified a lot of this, utilized the clean slate of the movie, and have presented one of the most intelligent and formiddable Doctors in the franchise. It's like they took the best elements of Doctors Four and Seven and produced perfection.

Again though I fell a little sad we couldn't have some how skipped from Four to Eight.

I'll leave any discussion of New Who Doctors for another time, possibly.

Tanmann wrote:I'll just say for now that Warriors of the Deep was the worst

Who'd have fucking guessed it, eh?

Are you really sure it IS just for now?

and not on every fucking post you do?

Rob Filth wrote:

Tanmann wrote:I'll just say for now that Warriors of the Deep was the worst

Who'd have fucking guessed it, eh?

Are you really sure it IS just for now?

and not on every fucking post you do?

Wow.

You're right, it was predictable I'd mention it.

It's almost as if it was actually relevant to a thread about the Doctor's weaknesses, or something.....

Tanmann wrote:

Rob Filth wrote:

Tanmann wrote:I'll just say for now that Warriors of the Deep was the worst

Who'd have fucking guessed it, eh?

Are you really sure it IS just for now?

and not on every fucking post you do?

Wow.

You're right, it was predictable I'd mention it.

It's almost as if it was actually relevant to a thread about the Doctor's weaknesses, or something.....

What a missed opportunity the thread wasn't about your weaknesses instead.

Your reaction would have been right on point then.

Rob Filth wrote:
What a missed opportunity the thread wasn't about your weaknesses instead.

What weaknesses?

Despising Warriors of the Deep, is not my ‘weakness’, in any way.

It’s part of who I am. It clarifies what I do believe, against what I don’t.

If I was the kind of fan who decided to like that rotten era just for the sake of liking it and being a fan who insipidly likes everything without any real passion (the kind of fans who just plain leave me cold, really), then that *would* be weak-willed of me.

Hating that story is part of what gives me passion, to love things in life as well as hate them. It helps clarify and enhance what I like, what I believe In, and who I am, by knowing and hating all the things I don’t.

It helps me appreciate good writing and what it can do, and the friends in my life who are nothing like the despicable, back-stabbing misanthropic Doctor of Warriors of the Deep, and work to be a better, loyal, compassionate friend and support to them than he was capable of being under Saward's pen.

If you want to be weak-willed and agree unquestioningly with that story's proscription of a phony facsimile of nobility, just because it's what fans are supposed to do, then go right ahead. But you will *never* bully me into liking it, because that would be weak-willed of me.

Tanmann wrote:What weaknesses?

Despising Warriors of the Deep, is not my ‘weakness’, in any way.

It is when you are too stupid to understand its premise.

Tanmann wrote:who are nothing like the despicable, back-stabbing misanthropic Doctor of Warriors of the Deep, and work to be a better, loyal, compassionate friend and support to them than he was capable of being under Saward's pen.

Thank you for just proving my point.

People who endorse nuclear weapons are THE most misanthropic cunts going.

Rob Filth wrote:[It is when you are too stupid to understand its premise.

But Rob, didn't you lose this argument when you pulled a dodge on me in the other thread?

Thank you for just proving my point.

Well you proved my point. I said you were weak-willed for believing that story's nonsense, and lo and behold you're still believing it.

People who endorse nuclear weapons are THE most misanthropic cunts going.

But you endorse nuclear weapons Rob.

You endorse the Doctor, who endorses the Silurians, who endorse nuclear weapons.

Therefore you endorse nuclear weapons.

Tanmann wrote:

But you endorse nuclear weapons Rob.

You endorse the Doctor, who endorses the Silurians, who endorse nuclear weapons.

Therefore you endorse nuclear weapons.

The Doctor doesn't endorse the Silurians you fucking half wit - he's trying to prevent war and genocide, it's why he's so reluctant to use the hexocromite gas and then only uses it as a last resort.

I'm not sure if you're just deliberately ignorant, trolling for attention or just willfully obtusely immature or possibly a combination of all three, but you're an incredibly tiresome dullard.

Rob Filth wrote:he's trying to prevent war and genocide, it's why he's so reluctant to use the hexocromite gas and then only uses it as a last resort.

In other words he's not really interested in preventing war or genocide, since the means were available and he was happy to ignore them.

I'm not sure if you're just deliberately ignorant, trolling for attention or just willfully obtusely immature or possibly a combination of all three, but you're an incredibly tiresome dullard.

No, you don't get to throw a pathetic two-month long tantrum over the fact I'm ignoring you, then pull a dodge when challenged, and then call me or anyone else the 'attention-seeking troll' here, Rob.

Tanmann wrote:

Rob Filth wrote:he's trying to prevent war and genocide, it's why he's so reluctant to use the hexocromite gas and then only uses it as a last resort.

In other words he's not really interested in preventing war or genocide, since the means were available and he was happy to ignore them.

Other than dialogue, diplomacy and persuasion which all failed, there WERE no other means you fucking idiot. Just how fucking completely thick are you?

Hence the final line of "...there should have been another way" which was diplomacy should've won through but the protagonists were too fucking thick like yourself to choose it.

Tanmann wrote:No, you don't get to throw a pathetic two-month long tantrum over the fact I'm ignoring you, then pull a dodge when challenged, and then call me or anyone else the 'attention-seeking troll' here, Rob.

I couldn't give a shit one way or the other if you DO put me on block because then at least I don't have to endure your tiresomely ignorant and obtuse bullshit.

The fact that you simply can not understand the moral message of a show largely marketed for children is laughable.

Rob Filth wrote:Other than dialogue, diplomacy and persuasion which all failed, there WERE no other means you fucking idiot.

Other than the obvious Hexacromite plot device, which could've saved the day from episode one?

But apart from that no, it's a complete mystery how the Doctor could possibly solve it.

I guess you must've missed it, even though it was telegraphed at the start and end.

Remind me who's the idiot again here?

Hence the final line of "...there should have been another way" which was diplomacy should've won through

Why should diplomacy have won through with a genocidal militia? Should diplomacy have won through with the Nazis, or the Interahamwe militias of Rwanda?

And you claim this story speaks to the real world...  

but the protagonists were too fucking thick like yourself to choose it.

In other words they didn't want to be part of the Doctor's pacifist suicide cult?

I couldn't give a shit one way or the other if you DO put me on block

But I DID put you on block.

And you demonstrably DID care.

For two months of belly-aching and throwing your toys out the pram.

The fact that you simply can not understand the moral message of a show largely marketed for children is laughable.

I do understand it's crank moral message.

That's why I know it's trash.

And make your mind up, Rob. Was Warriors aimed at kids or adults?

Well, I'd say it was pretty obviously aimed at fanboys who had come to believe their own bullshit about how important they were and how serious the show ought to be.

Tanmann wrote:Other than the obvious Hexacromite plot device, which could've saved the day from episode one?

But apart from that no, it's a complete mystery how the Doctor could possibly solve it.

Remind me who's the idiot again here?

Yeah cos genocide of an indigenous species is just what The Doctor is all about, hey? 

Idiot.

That's why you support the cowboys in westerns, right?

They're obviously the "good guys" unlike those injuns and anyone who claims otherwise is obviously a white-guy hating fucking racist, right?

Tanmann wrote:Why should diplomacy have won through with a genocidal militia? Should diplomacy have won through with the Nazis, or the Interahamwe militias of Rwanda?

And you claim this story speaks to the real world...  

It does speak of the real world in a heavily cynical fashion.

Diplomacy doesn't always work(as shown in the story), but it's noble to at least attempt to make it do so even if that attempt fails.

Tanmann wrote:In other words they didn't want to be part of the Doctor's pacifist suicide cult?

 Actually they wanted to be part of a warmongering ignorant suicide-cult instead, which is why they all ended up dead because none of them were prepared to listen to the Doctor, compromise and parlez instead. They were too fucking pig-headed like yourself.

Tanmann wrote:But I DID put you on block.

And you demonstrably DID care.

For two months of belly-aching and throwing your toys out the pram.

You DO lend yourself to some some fevered imagination!

I'm not the one deleting comments and then trolling by abusing your power to open up locked threads designed specifically to reinforce your dullard overly repeated opinion which everyone is fucking bored with hearing time and time and time again.

If you can't handle contra-opinions then you shouldn't be subjecting yours on public forums to begin with, you big baby. 

Tanmann wrote:I do understand it's crank moral message.

That's why I know it's trash.

And it wasn't aimed at kids, it was aimed at fanboys who had come to believe their own bullshit about how important they were and how serious the show ought to be.

If you understood it's message then you wouldn't consistently and tiresomely attribute a skewed, distorted and woefully misunderstood perspective of the points the narrative was attempting to make. 

I'd say advising people that stockpiling genocidal weapons is never a good idea is hardly a self-indulgence but a sensible piece of advice.

It's as much relevant today as it was when first transmitted, more so in fact when the people at most risk from our nuclear weapons are ourselves should any determined terrorist cell gain access to igniting them which is a piece of piss given the scores of reports of failed lapsed security around them.

There's little which is fan-boyish about nuclear genocide or do you think the residents of Nagasaki were all fucking Doctor Who fans too?

Rob Filth wrote:Yeah cos genocide of an indigenous species is just what The Doctor is all about, hey? 

Idiot.

Not genocide.

The Doctor gives Ictar some blab about how he should save himself because his people still need him.

Indicating his people are elsewhere.

Therefore these aren't the last of the Silurian race.

And even if they were, they chose their own destruction here.

It does speak of the real world

               

none of them were prepared to listen to the Doctor

Of course they weren't.

The guy was a genocidal militia-loving crank.

I'm not the one deleting comments

Neither am I. I haven't deleted a thing.

abusing your power

I knew you'd play the victim Rob.

If you understood it's message then you wouldn't consistently and tiresomely attribute a skewed, distorted and woefully misunderstood perspective of the points the narrative was attempting to make.

Weak-willed true believer fanboy.

I knew it  

There's little which is fan-boyish about nuclear genocide or do you think the residents of Nagasaki were all fucking Doctor Who fans too?

You *really* don't like me pointing out that it's fanboy trash do you?

And no, I don't think the people of Nagasaki wanted their sufferings highlighted by a piece of fanboy trash like Warriors of the Deep.

Tanmann wrote:Not genocide.

The Doctor gives Ictar some blab about how he should save himself because his people still need him.

Indicating his people are elsewhere.

Therefore these aren't the last of the Silurian race.

And even if they were, they chose their own destruction here.

He's the last of the triad custodians without which their people will never come out from hibernation.

By reluctantly using the gas and killing him the Doctor was responsible for genocide.

He should've let the Silurians allow the humans to wipe themselves out as they were stupidly fully intending to do anyway without any prompting from the Silurians. He saved them instead, the Doctor was obviously stupid enough to think human were redeemable and deserved a second chance.

Fuck only knows why when your own attitudes towards this story are examined.

Tanmann wrote:Of course they weren't.

The guy was a genocidal militia-loving crank

Yup, I guess that's why he saved the human race and planet.

Tanmann wrote:Neither am I. I haven't deleted a thing.

Removed them then, away from all context, if you want to be so crushingly pedantic about it.

It still amounts to an insecurity complex and god-delusion when one resorts to abuses of power.

Tanmann wrote:You *really* don't like me pointing out that it's fanboy trash do you?

And no, I don't think the people of Nagasaki wanted their sufferings highlighted by a piece of fanboy trash like Warriors of the Deep.

I get that it's a story ruined by falling down production values and shit direction, but the script is sound.

The Japanese have a more sensible and mature approach to nuclear weapons than yourself.

Rob Filth wrote:He's the last of the triad custodians without which their people will never come out from hibernation.

By reluctantly using the gas and killing him the Doctor was responsible for genocide.

Ictar was going to lead them to their own destruction anyway.

I guess that's why he saved the human race and planet.

Actually the Hexacromite did that.

Something he was opposed to

Removed them then, away from all context, if you want to be so crushingly pedantic about it.

It still amounts to an insecurity complex and god-delusion when one resorts to abuses of power.

In other words...... "WAH!...WAH!....WAH!.... THE NASTY MAN MOVED MY POSTS!"

I get that it's a story ruined by falling down production values and shit direction, but the script is sound.

Yep... you're definitely a weak-willed true-believer.

Tanmann wrote:Ictar was going to lead them to their own destruction anyway.

Not had he and the humans bothered to negotiate he wasn't.

But that's too much like hard work when you're sitting on stockpiles of WMD's, eh?

Tanmann wrote:Actually the Hexacromite did that.

Something he was opposed to

Wrong again, it was the Doctor plugging himself into the battle computer which did that, at the possible expense of his own life.

All the hexacromite did was extinguish the reptiles, not save the planet from the humans own means of destruction, created and built by them alone.

Tanmann wrote:In other words...... "WAH!...WAH!....WAH!.... THE NASTY MAN MOVED MY POSTS!"

        

Careful, you're going to ejaculate if that god-complex gets any more rapturous. You appear to be working yourself to a stupor.  

Tanmann wrote:Yep... you're definitely a weak-willed true-believer.

Don't you come out with one-liner charmers like "JNT apologist vermin scum" anymore?

Come on, you can do better than that! 

Okay a little constructive criticism. I know this might be rich coming from me since I bring up a lot of the same shit over and over again. (Dana Delorenzo, Ingrid Oliver etc.)

IMO this feud needs to stop now. I'm not taking sides as I get on with both really well, but in the end its just going round and round which I'm sure some people find amusing, but when there are entire threads devoted to it it can end up taking over the forum too much.

Again I know that's rich as I also got into a similar feud with Mike, but that bored the arse off of everyone here too, so I speak from experience.

burrunjor wrote:Okay a little constructive criticism. I know this might be rich coming from me since I bring up a lot of the same shit over and over again. (Dana Delorenzo, Ingrid Oliver etc.)

IMO this feud needs to stop now. I'm not taking sides as I get on with both really well, but in the end its just going round and round which I'm sure some people find amusing, but when there are entire threads devoted to it it can end up taking over the forum too much.

Again I know that's rich as I also got into a similar feud with Mike, but that bored the arse off of everyone here too, so I speak from experience.

Seconded (in relation to both the feud and my getting on very well with both members). This is getting ridiculous now, and indeed very monotonous.

I've no more replies to make to Rob.

If he agrees to stop too, fine.

If he carries this on, I hope no-one will object to me continuing to move his posts to the locked thread out of the way.

I won't be replying anymore.

Tanmann wrote:I've no more replies to make to Rob.

If he agrees to stop too, fine.

If he carries this on, I hope no-one will object to me continuing to move his posts to the locked thread out of the way.

I won't be replying anymore.

Glad to hear it.

Lets get back to talking about sensible, intelligent things.

Do you think Chibnall's toupee looks stupid?

Also do you think Jodie's scrunch expressions are like the faces Arnold Rimmer used to pull?

Also who do you think is the most gorgeous out of Ingrid Oliver and Dana Delorenzo.

I'd say Dana is sexier because of her husky voice and attitude, whilst Ingrid is cuter and her smile is more beautiful.