Poll - should the forum remain? (no plans to close it!)

[Bill W (2)]

(BTW Bill, it's "defuse")

There are indeed times when removing the firing mechanism is the wisest course of action but in others thining down the otherwise exlosive mixture of gases might be more appropriate.

[Bill W (2)]

Mainly due to the fact the forum does seem to hang for no reason every now and again.

.

It is worthy of note that the server availability (like this evening, Friday 2100 - 2200, 24.6.11) often leaves a great deal to be desired.

[dailywaffle]

Bill, I do not doubt the sincerity of your remarks. However your posting style is a major barrier to me contributing to this forum. And, harsh though it might seem, it would appear that I am not alone. My views are not necessarily 'right' or 'wrong' in this matter, but whether it be a case of (arguable) humour or of (alleged) repetition I ultimately found your contributions to be the messageboard equivalent of hitting myself repeatedly over head with a frying pan. As your posting count continued to ramp up, dwarfing all other contributors, it effectively became the Bill W blog.

None of this is intended to cause offence, all such views are only matters of opinion, but I would suggest that you give some thought as to the quantity and content of your posts. It is entirely your prerogative to dismiss my views, and the views of other ex-posters, but I would recommend a period of reflection. I should add that I have not read much of your work for some months now, and my views may therefore be historic and thus out of date.

More generally, and despite the reasons given by Rizzo, it does a shame to have excluded a major Tigers-centric forum from the survey in favour of Twitter and Facebook.

[tigers fan]

I don't post much because certain people want to argue with you or take things the wrong way.
Or they think their opinion is all that matters(so they scare you really into not posting)
I would like it to stay
I probally read it at least twice a day.
I find out a lot of information on here.
I also visit Twitter and Facebook.

[Phil B]

Bill, I do not doubt the sincerity of your remarks. However your posting style is a major barrier to me contributing to this forum. And, harsh though it might seem, it would appear that I am not alone. My views are not necessarily 'right' or 'wrong' in this matter, but whether it be a case of (arguable) humour or of (alleged) repetition I ultimately found your contributions to be the messageboard equivalent of hitting myself repeatedly over head with a frying pan. As your posting count continued to ramp up, dwarfing all other contributors, it effectively became the Bill W blog.

None of this is intended to cause offence, all such views are only matters of opinion, but I would suggest that you give some thought as to the quantity and content of your posts. It is entirely your prerogative to dismiss my views, and the views of other ex-posters, but I would recommend a period of reflection. I should add that I have not read much of your work for some months now, and my views may therefore be historic and thus out of date.

I agree entirely with the general thrust of what you are saying.

I saw this on another forum recently:


I fully accept what DI is saying. Unfortunately what we are talking about here is that not unusual beast, the forum freak.

This condition is not specifically age related. It is, undoubtedly, a form of addiction. There are a number of clearly identifiable behavioural features. Sufferers will exhibit some, maybe almost all, of them.

Addiction. The sufferer devotes an inordinate amount of effort to the forum. Generates multiple posts on a daily basis. Often tracks in real time all posts so as to be able to respond immediately. Under intense pressure will announce the intention to resign. The threat hardly ever carried out.

Possession. The forum appears to the sufferer to be a direct extension of his or her persona. Very low tolerance levels to anything seen as criticism.

Obsession. A strong conviction that the sufferer presents the only valid view on any subject upon which they expound. Criticism is seen as a direct attack.

Exclusion. Very low tolerance of subject matter of which he/she knows nothing or does not approve. May well try to block discussion using a variety of tactics.

Expertise. The belief in the ability to make a valuable contribution on almost any subject.

Limited reference points. A small core of themes to which the sufferer constantly refers. Also known as the Gramophone Record syndrome.

DI advocates compassion. Who would challenge this? But, with the incessant poster, we have all the ingredients of a moral dilemma. We may have to balance the collective need against the circumstances of the individual.


Forum Freaks can appear very useful when a forum is launched. They produce abundant activity which draws in other contributors. Long term they can have the opposite effect. They inhibit participation and may even bring into being a clique which actively deters “Outsiders”. This forum is run on democratic lines which, I believe, is the best defence. I strongly urge Peter to keep things the way they are.

Although I object to the use of the word "freak" (which is unnecessarily offensive) I find much of this relevant. At the end of the day however, we have to uphold democratic principles and allow people to express themselves in any manner they wish, within the rules and as often as they like. But as a number of posters have commented, including but not limited to Dailywaffle, this does come at a price.

[Ben the Tiger]

Whilst I do not post on the forum as reguarly as I once did, I still look at it on a daily basis and enjoy some of the discussions and news which is broadcast on here. It acts as a way to find out about news which I otherwise wouldn't find out about because I do not look on a wide range of websites.

However, one of the major reasons as to why I don't contribute as much is because of the incessant arguing and :censored: which takes over almost every post. The sad thing is that this is not a widespread problem but appears to be limited to a few individuals who have personal gripes with one another and will constantly make it known. Others persistent on speaking down to people when they start a discussion or don't conform to their way of posting. A possible solution to this issue it to introduce a yellow card scheme, one for a stern warning having ignored other general requests and then if you continue and gain yourself another yellow card within the space of a certain period of time, a month per say, then you are banned from posting on the forum for a period of time, such as one week. Hopefully people might then start to stop bickering and speaking down to people.

[palletman]

Just read the two previous postings and can not agree more. I look most days and see the same old people posting and see the discussion drop to a more personal level and away from the POINT.

Like you i have given up posting because i speak it as it is, as i see it and like a lot of fans do, but do not say. Why? Because often they get shouted down. My view is why bother posting anymore, as it seems that your view gets rubbished or the CLUB ingore what is going on.

Classic example to this comment is the PUBLIC CATERING problems that TIGERDAD has spent 12 months trying to sort with the club. Result, a bit like the number of cups/titles this last season. None as far as the public can see.
So we now look after ourselfs, eat and drink elsewhere, support the team during the match and get out as quick as possible to spend our money elsewhere. So instead of bashing each other on a personal basis PLEASE try and improve ALL our lot by putting pressure on the club in a constructive way rather than knocking someones views that they are entitled to post.

[fleabane]

Jgriffin, Interested in your post, but please note I do not post on the unoffy, but occasionally do on Bath and Pests sites. If there is a fleabane elsewhere, it ain't me!

To the thread. To those who complain about people with a bee in their bonnet about some issue or other, what about arguing the point with them? Surely better than moaning about their continual posting?

I suppose how you concern yourself with them, depends on whether or not you agree with their stated point of view. Some of us continue down a particular path, and will continue to do so until the issue is resolved, one way or the other. On the way we will have numerous encounters with other posters, hopefully with both parties retaining their manners.

There are posters who irritate me, but I will not enter into a bickering argument, or trade personal insults with them. For me, they are the people who spoil the forum, and well done the mods for managing them so well!

[TTRITH]

This forum has been getting silly for sometime. What used to be a good source of debate too often goes down the road of insults.

That being said, every now and then you still get a good thread that remains on topic and reminds me of why I enjoy this place.

[g]

I've heard Mornington Crescent mentioned a few times on this thread.Am I thick or something? What is Mornington Crescent.

[fleabane]

Euston Road, Greys Inn Road, . . . .Mornington Crescent!!!

It is a nonsensicle game from a radio show.

[Noggs]

I've heard Mornington Crescent mentioned a few times on this thread.Am I thick or something? What is Mornington Crescent.

Possibly the most difficult game in the world.

Playing it takes great skill based on years of careful study of the London underground system and timetable. There are a number of variations and the most skilful players are able to switch to different variations at will, thereby confounding their opponents.

Alas, the sports top adjudicator, Humph, is now supervising a much bigger game in the sky but this does not detract from the shear wonder of watching (or listening) to the masters of this amazing game do their stuff.

[Old Hob]

...and clue is on in 1hr 14 mins