c_n_anderson

I'm going to say comedy writer/standup. The free version of IMDB lists Nick Swardson's Pretend time as his most current gig, but he has also mentioned that he is working on the Beavis and Butthead reboot that is starting later this month.

And the Tuesday October 11 live show of Comedy Bang Bang is no longer accepting reservations. Really would have been a treat to see Dassalo in that theater. Damn you comedy nerds!

For those of you in L.A., Tommy Dassalo from the Little Dum Dum club is going to be on the Comedy Bang Bang live show next Tuesday! I hope I can find out when to make an advanced reservation - they always go so quick for that show. While I loved being a guest on the Epilogue episode, I almost wonder if some of the feedback (both on the epilogue episode and for Jeff/Frank/Matt to consider for a potential future season) should be coming from the podcast contestants themselves - clearly they will have a different perspective to add. I'd be particularly interested to know whether if any podcast contestants were disappointed that they didn't get more time to interact with and/or respond to comments by some of the great guest judges on the podcast. Each week, only the bottom three got to interact directly with the guest judges. Obviously, the show could easily become a sprawling mess if each guest judge were to skype call each podcast contestant, but it would still be a treat to directly hear every podcasts' reaction to guest judges notes (not just the bottom three).

@Bucho In my mind, the criteria has been incredibly clear ever since Scott and Jeff told everyone their single criterion for the final week: the judges voted on whichever podcasts they prefer. This was true for Scott and Jeff, and was true for all of the judges. Clearly, preferences are subjective and of course people are going to prefer different things. . What was often discussed (sometimes over-discussed in my mind) was not criteria, but the details of a task - for example, how to incorporate a guest, what a theme and intro ought to do, or, most infamously, what counted as a recurring segment. In my mind, this is where the show sometimes got repetitive at the detriment of instead specializing on the strengths/shortcomings of each individual podcast. Obviously, a balance between both would be nice - and clearly discussing the nuts and bolts of these podcast components can help serve as instruction to help anyone launch their own podcast. But the main goal of the Earwolf Challenge (at the end of the day) is to be entertaining. When I suggested that the show frame each podcast in how they were changing, Matt countered by saying that not every podcast necessarily had to change - that when Elizabeth got all tense responding to feedback she did worse. If the show wanted the podcasts only to succeed they would just give them tasks well suited to what they do (in their wheelhouse). Instead, the show is called "The Challenge". I stand by my contention that watching shows struggle and overcome difficulty is more entertaining than shows keeping on doing their "own thing". Though, this too, is probably a matter of preference as well. So it goes.

I thought my voice on the podcast sounded a little like Brady's. I hope folks could tell the difference between us. I got a little amped up for this and probably violated a couple of the goals I set for myself before recording this. The goals: 1. Don't talk too much 2. Don't try to be funny - let the funny people be funny 3. Be honest - if somebody says something I disagree with, then disagree - it will only make the show more interesting. I was honest, so at least I got the last one right. I think I only left out one thing - that if people want a season two of the Earwolf Challenge, then providing a donation wouldn't hurt the cause. In fact, it would most definitely help. Donation forms are on every podcast's home page and I bet the tech guys know which show is initiating the most donations. If I were Jeff Ullrich, the decision of whether or not to have a season two would be relatively easy if the show was bringing in a bunch of money.

From this interview: they'll stay in the house. http://www.laughspin.com/2011/09/16/totally-laime-podcast-wins-the-earwolf-challenge-we-chat-with-elizabeth-laime/

From this interview: they'll stay in the house. http://www.laughspin.com/2011/09/16/totally-laime-podcast-wins-the-earwolf-challenge-we-chat-with-elizabeth-laime/

@cakebob The bumbershoot music lineup doesn't particularly strike me as hippy focused: http://bumbershoot.org/lineup/ ; but my knowledge of "hippy" music ends at Phish, the String Cheese Incident, and Bela Fleck and the Fleck tones. . Many of our favorite earwolf hosts and guests probably can't be generalized to just one genre of music though. The Sklar Bros play indie music at the start of every show. Doug Benson has mentioned his love of the band 311 (!) and Broadway (i am guessing both plays and musicals). Both Scott Aukerman and Rob Delaney have musical theater backgrounds. Scott in particular seems to be a fan of rarer Sondheim work. He's also done parody songs of pop acts like Lady Gaga and Beyonce. One of the Apple sisters (seedy?) is currently performing in Jersey Boys. Brian Posehn is a huge metal-head. Jimmy Pardo likes Chicago, Kiss, and a bunch of other bands from the early 80's. PFT is performing with Ted Leo at Largo this weekend and has performed in the past with Aimee Mann and a whole host of other diverse musicians that commonly perform at Largo (Sara and Sean Watkins). Ed Helms does banjo/bluegrass music. Howard Kremer knows a lot about rap/hip hop and Kulap is pretty knowledgeable about top 40 music/dance-able tracks. . Everyone probably likes Prince though, cause he's pretty great. And "Bat Dance" is Scott's favorite song. With the exception of Harris Wittels, none of this points to your classic "hippy" scene.

@cakebob The bumbershoot music lineup doesn't particularly strike me as hippy focused: http://bumbershoot.org/lineup/ ; but my knowledge of "hippy" music ends at Phish, the String Cheese Incident, and Bela Fleck and the Fleck tones. . Many of our favorite earwolf hosts and guests probably can't be generalized to just one genre of music though. The Sklar Bros play indie music at the start of every show. Doug Benson has mentioned his love of the band 311 (!) and Broadway (i am guessing both plays and musicals). Both Scott Aukerman and Rob Delaney have musical theater backgrounds. Scott in particular seems to be a fan of rarer Sondheim work. He's also done parody songs of pop acts like Lady Gaga and Beyonce. One of the Apple sisters (seedy?) is currently performing in Jersey Boys. Brian Posehn is a huge metal-head. Jimmy Pardo likes Chicago, Kiss, and a bunch of other bands from the early 80's. PFT is performing with Ted Leo at Largo this weekend and has performed in the past with Aimee Mann and a whole host of other diverse musicians that commonly perform at Largo (Sara and Sean Watkins). Ed Helms does banjo/bluegrass music. Howard Kremer knows a lot about rap/hip hop and Kulap is pretty knowledgeable about top 40 music/dance-able tracks. . Everyone probably likes Prince though, cause he's pretty great. And "Bat Dance" is Scott's favorite song. With the exception of Harris Wittels, none of this points to your classic "hippy" scene.

@cakebob I think the "hippy/drum circle" reference is driven more by the general area: Seattle and the northwestern portion of the U.S. as opposed the specific bumbershoot/comedy audience. I've only been a couple times, but I would describe the DLM/CBB audience as more of a comedy nerd/hipster vibe. You know, ironic t-shirts, thick-rimmed glasses, tight jeans, etc. Harris Wittels' love of Phish seems to be an outlier - think more Death Cab for Cutie and less Grateful Dead.

@cakebob I think the "hippy/drum circle" reference is driven more by the general area: Seattle and the northwestern portion of the U.S. as opposed the specific bumbershoot/comedy audience. I've only been a couple times, but I would describe the DLM/CBB audience as more of a comedy nerd/hipster vibe. You know, ironic t-shirts, thick-rimmed glasses, tight jeans, etc. Harris Wittels' love of Phish seems to be an outlier - think more Death Cab for Cutie and less Grateful Dead.

Great show. I was fine with either show winning - and I'll be subscribing to both and hopefully get a chance to go to the CBB live show when Tommy is on. . I thought it was funny when Elizabeth asked Charlie what his biggest fear was. Maybe not as funny as when Scott used to ask his guests how much money they made last year or their exact address, but I think all of those questions work to initiate funny comedic discussions even if they don't necessarily put the guest "at ease". It's a comedy podcast, I am not expecting serious answers to any of those questions. . I'd love to hear (and even potentially participate) in the bonus episode if that is still going to happen.

Great show. I was fine with either show winning - and I'll be subscribing to both and hopefully get a chance to go to the CBB live show when Tommy is on. . I thought it was funny when Elizabeth asked Charlie what his biggest fear was. Maybe not as funny as when Scott used to ask his guests how much money they made last year or their exact address, but I think all of those questions work to initiate funny comedic discussions even if they don't necessarily put the guest "at ease". It's a comedy podcast, I am not expecting serious answers to any of those questions. . I'd love to hear (and even potentially participate) in the bonus episode if that is still going to happen.

I thought the rapport with Besser was better from yesterday's episode, though I still did like the coaching theme of responses to past judges notes. I think the skype connection hampers the natural give and take - though that it nobody's fault given that LDDC is in Australia and Matt and Frank are in Los Angeles. . As others have stated, I thought the LDDC submission got a little antic and crowded with all of the voices in the room - though sometimes the chaos is part of the fun. There have been many classic CBB moments featuring a large cast of characters. A solid submission from LDDC nonetheless. . Oh, and apparently there is another poster on this forum that also goes by "Chris Anderson"....and he's a fan of Phish. That is not me - I prefer my songs much shorter than 6-25 minutes. I like tracks the length of most Pixies or Robert Pollard songs. . EDIT: Username fixed now. Thanks Shahruz!

I thought the rapport with Besser was better from yesterday's episode, though I still did like the coaching theme of responses to past judges notes. I think the skype connection hampers the natural give and take - though that it nobody's fault given that LDDC is in Australia and Matt and Frank are in Los Angeles. . As others have stated, I thought the LDDC submission got a little antic and crowded with all of the voices in the room - though sometimes the chaos is part of the fun. There have been many classic CBB moments featuring a large cast of characters. A solid submission from LDDC nonetheless. . Oh, and apparently there is another poster on this forum that also goes by "Chris Anderson"....and he's a fan of Phish. That is not me - I prefer my songs much shorter than 6-25 minutes. I like tracks the length of most Pixies or Robert Pollard songs. . EDIT: Username fixed now. Thanks Shahruz!

I liked this episode from top to bottom. I really thought the coaching session worked well - especially because Besser had a chance to talk to TL for more than just a few minutes and really incorporated well a discussion of notes from past judges. I've listened to a couple TL podcasts (I listen to anything Paul F Tompkins has been on, so I've listened to a couple LDDC also - PFT has been on a lot of podcasts). Their submission is a good example of what their podcast is, of who they are. Maybe they aren't for everyone, but what podcast is? I liked their submission and I am looking forward to hearing the LDDC tomorrow!

I liked this episode from top to bottom. I really thought the coaching session worked well - especially because Besser had a chance to talk to TL for more than just a few minutes and really incorporated well a discussion of notes from past judges. I've listened to a couple TL podcasts (I listen to anything Paul F Tompkins has been on, so I've listened to a couple LDDC also - PFT has been on a lot of podcasts). Their submission is a good example of what their podcast is, of who they are. Maybe they aren't for everyone, but what podcast is? I liked their submission and I am looking forward to hearing the LDDC tomorrow!

@Mark Thompson I must have gotten you confused with someone else. Sorry for claiming that you thought you were being silenced on this board. I should have looked into your posting history (which is kind of hard to do). Sorry again for getting that wrong.

@Mark Thompson I must have gotten you confused with someone else. Sorry for claiming that you thought you were being silenced on this board. I should have looked into your posting history (which is kind of hard to do). Sorry again for getting that wrong.

@Mark Thompson . Dave Anthony has made two posts giving his candid opinion. You've made many, many, more than two posts giving your candid opinion with the attitude of "I regret nothing", "you guys can't handle my opinion", "don't try to silence me". . What do you want from Dave Anthony? I personally think it's really nice that he choose to contribute. Would you prefer that he just said nothing?

@Mark Thompson . Dave Anthony has made two posts giving his candid opinion. You've made many, many, more than two posts giving your candid opinion with the attitude of "I regret nothing", "you guys can't handle my opinion", "don't try to silence me". . What do you want from Dave Anthony? I personally think it's really nice that he choose to contribute. Would you prefer that he just said nothing?

Not that anyone is tracking my comments, but I have said before that the show has always seemed fair, and this week's challenge did nothing to change my assessment. The judges critiques and feedback has always been the most interesting part of the show and I trust that if any judge was unclear on the guidelines, they'd ask. . There are now a sizable number of commenters echo-ing Sam's sentiment to "keep doing your shit". I don't want to sound like a shill, but posting encouraging comments on a forum is one thing, but you know what can REALLY keep the hardworking folks at earwolf "doing their shit"? DONATING to the show. . I've always thought it was a shame that the Earwolf guys chose to couch their donation pitch as "help us get into a nicer studio". I'm donating right now, and I am not donating for real estate, I am donating for the PEOPLE that help make the show. Apparently, Frank is going to go back to looking for a restaurant job (as I learned from the nice "get to know the producer" segment from the last two weeks). It seems that while many have shared the workload, Frank has been the guy that has been steering the ship on this whole thing. And it's been great. While Besser is the public face of this show, I am sure there are a whole lot of other people working for little to no money to keep the show going and the commercial this week nicely pointed out that your donations help support all those people. Did anyone else notice that one of the little dum dum's rants circled around a change of plans regarding a flight to Los Angeles? I bet that could have happened if more people supported the show financially. So for those that want to support the show, I say: "put your money where your mouth is".

Not that anyone is tracking my comments, but I have said before that the show has always seemed fair, and this week's challenge did nothing to change my assessment. The judges critiques and feedback has always been the most interesting part of the show and I trust that if any judge was unclear on the guidelines, they'd ask. . There are now a sizable number of commenters echo-ing Sam's sentiment to "keep doing your shit". I don't want to sound like a shill, but posting encouraging comments on a forum is one thing, but you know what can REALLY keep the hardworking folks at earwolf "doing their shit"? DONATING to the show. . I've always thought it was a shame that the Earwolf guys chose to couch their donation pitch as "help us get into a nicer studio". I'm donating right now, and I am not donating for real estate, I am donating for the PEOPLE that help make the show. Apparently, Frank is going to go back to looking for a restaurant job (as I learned from the nice "get to know the producer" segment from the last two weeks). It seems that while many have shared the workload, Frank has been the guy that has been steering the ship on this whole thing. And it's been great. While Besser is the public face of this show, I am sure there are a whole lot of other people working for little to no money to keep the show going and the commercial this week nicely pointed out that your donations help support all those people. Did anyone else notice that one of the little dum dum's rants circled around a change of plans regarding a flight to Los Angeles? I bet that could have happened if more people supported the show financially. So for those that want to support the show, I say: "put your money where your mouth is".

Kulap and Jordan noted that their own podcasts are probably subject to the same criticisms that they dished out this week. Here are some modest suggestions to improve the Earwolf Challenge itself as a podcast using some of the same criticisms that judges have used. One of the recurring themes from all the judges is how intimate and personal the podcasting medium is. Probably my favorite note this week was from Jordan when he said: "A podcast is about your personalities and opinions, just trust that those are listenable". I feel that I have found out a lot about Besser throughout the 6 weeks of 3 podcasts a week: that he likes sci-fi, is not a fan of "meta" comedy, is not a fan of "so bad its good" comedy, that he likes to say "I don't know" when coaching, that he thinks comedy is tough if you do it all alone, and that he prefers a "socratic method" of hosting the show. Due to this "socratic method" Besser typically draws in one of the two (?) associate producers into dialogue (especially during the Day 1 episodes). Unfortunately, I know next to nothing about the personalities and opinions of the associate producers. I know a little more about the producers due to Day 1 from this week (where they and Besser discussed feedback offered on this very forum), but unfortunately any development of them as "on air personalities" disappeared as the associate producers did not contribute to the discussion during Days 2 and 3 of the podcast. Furthermore, the really only provided information and not really opinions (I'm sorry but I know one producer is named Frank and I can't remember the name of the second one). If Besser wants to use a "socratic" method to host the show, he shouldn't host the show alone. He should have a co-host or a side-kick that contributes to all podcast episodes. As it stands, the incorporation of the associate producers "on air" is confusing. They are typically not "on mic" (more on that later) and because I have not established a "listening" relationship with them, I am not sure why I should pay attention when they talk. Either they should contribute a whole lot less or a whole lot more. Either way, we should get to know their names (they should be introduced before answering a question, as if a listener is hearing the show for the first time). . For all the talk about sound quality from judges throughout the six weeks, I am really surprised that "The Earwolf Challenge" itself features so many instances of "on mic/off mic" dialogue. If it is supposed to be funny, I don't get it. It just sounds shitty. Perhaps because the show has recently discovered it "socratic" nature, the producers can be excused for answering Matt's questions off mic during the show introduction. But the inclusion of "on mic/off mic" dialogue in the commercials is really puzzling - you had the opportunity to re-record the bit and drop it in whatever you wanted and went with the one where an unnamed producers starts "off mic" and ends up "on mic" (from this past week)? Or the ones from a couple weeks back where Besser echoes prompts just given to him off mic? If you made producing a commercial an actual task in the challenge and had external judges compare contestant submissions to any commercial featuring sloppy mic work produced by the podcast itself, I'd be surprised to see "The Earwolf Challenge" out of the bottom three. Oh, and in Skype go to Tools>Options>Sounds>Select which events play a sound and turn off the "hang up" option. The default skype hang up tone sounds bush league. . One of the more forceful critiques this week was from Besser toward Bob and Dan to "have a plan" for the day 1 coaching session. I will speculate here on the current set-up, but I wonder if structural changes (especially with regards to planning) can make the coaching sessions and the bottom 3 phone calls/defenses more interesting to listen to. I am curious if other forum members share my opinion that Day 2 works best as a podcast episode, followed by Day 3, and Day 1 trails far behind. On one hand, Day 2 is interesting because it includes interactions between well-known luminaries in podcasting. They are all physically located in the same room, so non-verbal cues can lead to a natural rhythm when they assess what they think of the same submission. It also seems to me that there is a degree of non-recording preparation (i.e. before they hit record, they can talk about what points they want to hit.) The dialogue during the coaching sessions and the bottom 3 phone calls/defenses seems less prepared. I am most certainly not advocating that you script out the interactions, but having a plan seems wise. For example, Besser seemed to touch on a good concept this week by pretending he was Bill Gates/Steve Jobs/Podcasting Mogul and asking the different podcasts to present their pitch to join the podcasting network. The podcasts could have been notified that this was "the game" as opposed to having to "find the game" (they aren't doing improv). A simple email prior to the coaching session saying "Besser's going to ask you for a thirty second pitch pretending he is a podcasting mogul" could have avoided the stammering and confusion as each podcast attempts on the fly to produce a cogent argument. Similarly, defenses could be better mounted if an email sent to all teams (even half an hour before the potential bottom 3 phone call) listed what the general critique topics were about that week's submission. If you sent the feedback to all the teams via email then it would still be a surprise when a team finds out their inclusion in the bottom 3, but again they can mount a cogent argument. I get the impression that the only off air prompting that the podcast contestants get is an email stating what the rules are of that week's challenge (e.g. topic and length). . I thought the most interesting defense all season happened when the F + stated in the most recent episode that the current note was the polar opposite of the note from the PFT episode. I could easily see this being something that they could have missed "on the fly" only to wake up at 3 AM the next morning and realize the contradiction. Also note that "push back" made the interaction interesting. I have posted on this forum before my disapproval that the Challenge may seek to discourage "too much pushback". (To be fair, this sentiment only reared its head once with Ham Radio, and since then its seemed to be pretty much a non-issue). . Some final comments - I thought Jordan's critique not to do "fake teasers" was off base. Fake teasers are one of my favorite recurring bits in CBB. Remember when they were going to count down 100 top songs (from the last decade?) but only got through the first few notes of "Jam Rock"? Remember when Scott was going to premiere his new song parody (was it Beyonce?) but got interuppted by the "hot line"? Remember when Scott and Gillian were going to do a beat by beat discussion of the upcoming season of Community only to be foiled by the "open door policy"? All really funny. . Don't get me wrong. I love this show, the contestants, the judges, the hosts, and the associate producers. My suggestions are only meant as constructive.

Besser raises good points about the importance of positive and constructive feedback in this week’s coaching episode (Using a famous guest: Day One). It’s a shame, then, that day 3 of the challenge only features phone calls to contestants in the bottom 3 and not to contestants that “succeeded” in their challenge. I was brainstorming questions that I thought Besser could ask during the day one coaching session, and among the questions included: “What specific change have you made to your podcast in response to a judge’s note? What judge’s note do you feel that your podcast is still struggling to address?” Then I realized that, the little dum dum club, because they have never been in the bottom three, have never received a judge’s note (at least it has never been told “to their face”). The only way they can find out what PFT, Marc Maron, Howard Kremer, Matt Gourley, Kulap Vilasak, etc. thought of their “Challenge” submission is to go back and listen to the Day 2 episode from the week they were judges. If, as for the vast majority of the season, the episodes are “in the can” – then they are literally “flying blind” with response to how their podcast has been received by anyone other than Besser (who can offer an assessment during day one of the coaching challenge). I don’t know what the solution is to this problem – is it too much of an imposition to ask the judges to call all the podcasts during the day 3 segment? It certainly seems less of one now that there are only 4 podcasts left, but early in the competition that is a lot of phone calls. That many phone calls could get boring and repetitive. As has been suggested before, I do think a “winner” of the week would be a good idea, and the judges could at least call the “winner” during the day 3 segment. Maybe the day one coaching session could feature an audio clip of how the judge’s reacted to the specific podcast submissions from prior day 2 episodes. I don’t think that would get too repetitive for the listener, and it would give both Matt and the podcasts a “jumping off point” for further coaching. . Oh, I really like the idea of a “bonus ep” called “tell it to my face” featuring interactions with forum commenters and I’d be interested in potentially participating. My twitter handle is c_n_anderson so feel free to DM me. Or I'll just wait for an announcement saying how to sign up to participate.