I have only viewed about a half an hour of Quizmania a few times. By far it is the best show on commercial television. I am not being sarcastic, violence bores me, American sentimentality is sugary sickening, I had over dosed on sports years ago and can only tolerate a half hour of highlights a week. I dont watch much tv but the ABC and SBS seem to be the only channels interested in diversity and quality. Again Quizmania by far is the best tv show on commercial tv. Although its not good enough to hold my attention , why should commercial tv get rid of its best show?

From what I have seen Quizmania is not gambling , its gives prizes there is no betting, it is no different than any other game show. The confusion comes as its set looks like a poker machine. Maybe it is better to draw in gambling addicts to watch tv and try and win prizes than have them go out and really gamble.

There is nothing offensive about the hosts, the few times I have seen the show there were no bikinis. I suggest to people , if you dont like a program dont watch it. There is always plenty to do around the house and millions of books to read.

And how many prizes have you won west? How many people do you know who have won prizes? Do you have children? Have you ever had phone bills run up from children calling 1900 numbers, particularly during Big Brother? It is a shock. They honestly have no concept of paying for their jollies. Some adults are worse.

It is all a cult, West, (lol) and "to join a cult, you must be a member of a cult". lol.

This is not a moralistic crusade west; this is a matter of "tackarama".

I mean, addiction exists.

Have you ever seen "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"? This was a biography of a famous photographer for a sports magazine.

He found himself in a Vegas casino, addicted to copious amounts of drugs, sex, and a pig swill of endulgence. Even the carpet patterns started climbing his leg. The people in the casino turn to lizards. I'm sure at an older age, he regrets such stupidity. He blames Las Vegas and society and said it was hell.

Remember the scene in "Drug Store Cowboy" with Matt Dillon. We saw a rare scene of William Boroughs playing the role of the junkie priest. When they deliver some narcotics, he lightens up and crosses himself, puts the drugs on the bible and says "God bless you my son" and sorts out his poison of choice. Dear old Boroughs. At least it wasn't insecticide this time. Imagine being addicted to insecticide. The outcasted heir to the largest drug company on earth. Reduced to squaler in beatnick dignity, he blamed society and called it hell.

If we blame society, what responsibility does society have?

As to quizarama, this is just an example of plenty of other scams to lure those with gambling addiction. You clearly don't understand addiction if you honestly believe that this posting is just a moralistic monologue. I don't watch the stuff, so I don't know when she wears the bikini top or not. Your rainbow serpent seems to know. lol.

Are you serious? Quizmania is the price of a phone call. Yes nearly as bad as trash tv such as Australian Idol or Big Brother or other shows the 'sucker' has to ring and vote for.

What about TV evangilists squeezing the last cents out of god addicts? People actually get up at 3am to buy a piece of jesus.

No I have not participated in Quizmania, I am just saying compared to everything else on commercial television Quizmania is the best show by far. Having said that I do not like it and have rarely seen it.

Hmmm, saintfletcher.

You ask

>>Have you ever seen "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"?<<

From the synopsis that follows, I suspect you must have slept through it yourself

>>This was a biography of a famous photographer for a sports magazine. He found himself in a Vegas casino, addicted to copious amounts of drugs, sex, and a pig swill of endulgence. Even the carpet patterns started climbing his leg. The people in the casino turn to lizards. I'm sure at an older age, he regrets such stupidity. He blames Las Vegas and society and said it was hell<<

The movie was based on a book by Hunter S Thompson, and the main character, Raoul Duke, is based on himself. So it is autobiographical, not a biography. And he's a journalist, not a photographer. As Thompson/Duke says at one point:

"This is a very ominous assignment -- with overtones of extreme personal danger. I'm a Doctor of Journalism! This is important, goddamnit! This is a true story!..."

And to cap it off, all the evidence available points to the fact that he never once "at an older age, he [regretted] such stupidity".

In fact, I have his book "Kingdom of Fear" in front of me as I write, and I can assure you that when he wrote:

"I was a notorious best selling author of weird and brutal books and also a widely feared newspaper columnist... I was also drunk, crazy and heavily armed at all times."

... it was with pride, not shame. True, he was not what you might call a well-balanced citizen, but he was not given to either self-pity or regret.

Altogether, it rather takes the edge off whatever point it was you were trying to make.

'Cos if you manage to get the simple facts wrong about whatever it is you are watching, it hardly suggests that you are going to draw any meaning from it.

Or none that is actually suggested by the text, that is.

p.s. The photographer in Las Vegas was actually a Portuguese named Lacerda. He didn't do drugs.