Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Taylor

Lucy Desi Center on Facebook

Recommended Posts

Taylor    427

Sorry, this is just a little vent, but whoever runs the Lucy-Desi Center page on Facebook is not very bright. They posted wrong "facts" about Viv and Lucy on their site and whenever somebody tries to correct them, not in a mean way, they delete them. Guess they don't wanna look stupid? WTF, censorship much?! :lucydisgust:

 

Man, get your facts straight before posting them publically. ER DUHHHHR... :peachonthebeach:

 

Ok, rant over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, this is just a little vent, but whoever runs the Lucy-Desi Center page on Facebook is not very bright. They posted wrong "facts" about Viv and Lucy on their site and whenever somebody tries to correct them, not in a mean way, they delete them. Guess they don't wanna look stupid? WTF, censorship much?! :lucydisgust:

 

Man, get your facts straight before posting them publically. ER DUHHHHR... :peachonthebeach:

 

Ok, rant over.

 

 

If this is the way they run that site. It won't last.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taylor    427

We can certainly hope. For a "professional" place dedicated to Lucy and Desi, you'd think they'd check their facts first before looking like idiots. That's embarassing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taylor    427

They said Viv was just a year older than Lucy and then the bullcrap about the contract stating she had to weigh over 20 pounds more than Lucy in order to stay on ILL. Viv was born in 1909, Lucy in 1911, that makes 2 years, right? LOL. And I'd always heard that the contract thing was just an urban legend. Someone pointed this out on there and they were deleted promptly, like twice. Annoying.

 

Not big deals, but if they get little things like this wrong, what else are they getting wrong and stating as fact?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Magster    66

They said Viv was just a year older than Lucy and then the bullcrap about the contract stating she had to weigh over 20 pounds more than Lucy in order to stay on ILL. Viv was born in 1909, Lucy in 1911, that makes 2 years, right? LOL. And I'd always heard that the contract thing was just an urban legend. Someone pointed this out on there and they were deleted promptly, like twice. Annoying.

 

Not big deals, but if they get little things like this wrong, what else are they getting wrong and stating as fact?

 

Even Lucie Arnaz still thinks that Viv was actually one year younger than her mother, or at least she did as of the "Best of Here's Lucy" DVDs back in 2004. That was a rumor Viv herself perpetuated but was finally laid to rest when "The Other Side of Ethel Mertz" was published back in the 1990s. That Viv had to weigh 20 pounds more than Lucy was part of a GAG contract that Lucy herself gave to Viv as a joke. Viv reads part of it when she surprised Lucy on Dinah! back in the '70s, and if I'm remembering correctly Viv even says it was a joke. Unfortunately, it's sometimes still stated as fact, even in "The Lucy Book" (:lucyblah: :rolleyes:).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brock    3,373

Even Lucie Arnaz still thinks that Viv was actually one year younger than her mother, or at least she did as of the "Best of Here's Lucy" DVDs back in 2004. That was a rumor Viv herself perpetuated but was finally laid to rest when "The Other Side of Ethel Mertz" was published back in the 1990s.

 

I think the truth itself was first uncovered by Breck Richardson(?) on the I Love Lucy list a year or two before The Other Side of Ethel Mertz was published.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taylor    427

And it's carelessness from posting those things as a fact from a "reputable" place like the Lucy-Desi Center that people keep believing that stupid crap. Again, not a big deal really what they posted, but it just annoys me when people who should know better don't check their facts, and then act rudely to others who try to correct them out of consideration.

 

I just think it's funny they deleted the post altogether. They must've got some major feedback from others who knew better. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C L A U D E    2,006

Even Lucie Arnaz still thinks that Viv was actually one year younger than her mother, or at least she did as of the "Best of Here's Lucy" DVDs back in 2004. That was a rumor Viv herself perpetuated but was finally laid to rest when "The Other Side of Ethel Mertz" was published back in the 1990s. That Viv had to weigh 20 pounds more than Lucy was part of a GAG contract that Lucy herself gave to Viv as a joke. Viv reads part of it when she surprised Lucy on Dinah! back in the '70s, and if I'm remembering correctly Viv even says it was a joke. Unfortunately, it's sometimes still stated as fact, even in "The Lucy Book" (:lucyblah: :rolleyes:).

YOU'RE KIDDING, The Lucy Book got something W R O N G ! Unbelievable! :hlLOL::hlLOL::hlLOL::hlLOL::hlLOL:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C L A U D E    2,006

And it's carelessness from posting those things as a fact from a "reputable" place like the Lucy-Desi Center that people keep believing that stupid crap. Again, not a big deal really what they posted, but it just annoys me when people who should know better don't check their facts, and then act rudely to others who try to correct them out of consideration.

 

I just think it's funny they deleted the post altogether. They must've got some major feedback from others who knew better. LOL

AND Y O U are totally right of course about everything!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leenorman    506

Sorry, this is just a little vent, but whoever runs the Lucy-Desi Center page on Facebook is not very bright. They posted wrong "facts" about Viv and Lucy on their site and whenever somebody tries to correct them, not in a mean way, they delete them. Guess they don't wanna look stupid? WTF, censorship much?! :lucydisgust:

 

Man, get your facts straight before posting them publically. ER DUHHHHR... :peachonthebeach:

 

Ok, rant over.

 

 

Sounds almost like arrdubya and company are BACK!!!! That's the kind of s--- they pulled; you disagree, you go away!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw all of that yesterday, too. Puts a bad taste in my mouth that they delete helpful comments and later their post altogether. Hopefully it's a lesson learned for whomever runs the page to check all facts before posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C L A U D E    2,006

I saw all of that yesterday, too. Puts a bad taste in my mouth that they delete helpful comments and later their post altogether. Hopefully it's a lesson learned for whomever runs the page to check all facts before posting.

How many times have you read something that got it wrong? Happens all the time but you'd think that THERE they would have someone reliable as a fact checker. :lucydisgust:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times have you read something that got it wrong? Happens all the time but you'd think that THERE they would have someone reliable as a fact checker. :lucydisgust:

 

Of course, we might consider that they consulted a Lucy book that got it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C L A U D E    2,006

Of course, we might consider that they consulted a Lucy book that got it wrong.

True, that's the worst of all, someone like Lee Tannen having mistakes in his book. I mean, you'd think he'd be a Lucy expert. But to be fair, there were very few mistakes in HIS book, none in Jim Sheridan's though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taylor    427

True, that's the worst of all, someone like Lee Tannen having mistakes in his book. I mean, you'd think he'd be a Lucy expert. But to be fair, there were very few mistakes in HIS book, none in Jim's though.

 

Jim's book was bad. He had his stories mixed up and lots of mistakes. That's no doubt where the LDC got their information. Now we know. LMAO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C L A U D E    2,006

Jim's book was bad. He had his stories mixed up and lots of mistakes. That's no doubt where the LDC got their information. Now we know. LMAO

I was talking about the great JIM SHERIDAN, author of Lucille Ball FAQ Frequently Asked Questions, not the Jim Brochu one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taylor    427

I was talking about the great JIM SHERIDAN, author of Lucille Ball FAQ Frequently Asked Questions, not the Jim Brochu one.

 

Well say what you mean, dang it! lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C L A U D E    2,006

Well say what you mean, dang it! lol

I did, i went back and added his last name. You see, when i think of the great authors of Lucy books, Sheridan's name is the only one that comes to mind, totally forgot about Brochu having the same name, LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeySoCal    1,009

I did, i went back and added his last name. You see, when i think of the great authors of Lucy books, Sheridan's name is the only one that comes to mind, totally forgot about Brochu having the same name, LOL!

I'd like to totally forget that book and Brochu, too! Ugh! :lucyhorror:
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C L A U D E    2,006

I'd like to totally forget that book and Brochu, too! Ugh! :lucyhorror:

Hey, he knew how to make a buck off of her like so many others did, he played backgammon, took notes on all her comments and got a book out of it. Some people KNOW how to play the Hollywood game better than others i guess. He even landed a very small role in Lucy and Desi Before The Laughter too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it Nancy Schnepp who went into the newly unvaulted 1912 censorship records around 1997 and settled the VV age dispute once and for all? Definitely a few years before The Other Side Of Ethel Mertz came along. But, at least they got it right, too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luvsbway    2,049

Wasn't it Nancy Schnepp who went into the newly unvaulted 1912 censorship records around 1997 and settled the VV age dispute once and for all? Definitely a few years before The Other Side Of Ethel Mertz came along. But, at least they got it right, too!

 

 

I thought it was Breck that had done this research. I remember this happening on the list and thought that was a pretty cool thing to be doing. Interesting to read later in the book about Viv stealing her birth certificate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brock    3,373

I'm sifting through the charred remains of Nancy's brilliant site and I think I can piece together the chronology of events. I'll start a new thread about it on Viv's board so it doesn't get lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×