Club Officially Distances Itself From This Forum

[gazareth]

http://www.bcfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/...~775951,00.html

Can't say I'm surprised

Supporters who use the internet Bristol City Fans' Forum on a regular basis will soon notice a few minor changes to the service.

These are:-

- The link to the Fans' Forum will be removed from the official website and will instead placed on the Supporters Trust website: bristolcityst.org.uk.

- The Forum will be run independently of the football club. Responsibility for moderating the Forum will pass to the Trust, who will act on behalf of supporters using the Forum.

- The "Ask Steve L" section of the Forum will be closed and fans will instead be invited to send in questions for club chairman Steve Lansdown via the Supporters Trust website. It is envisaged these questions will be answered on a regular basis.

The changes will take place over the next few days, though the Forum itself will not actually be 'going' anywhere. It will retain its present URL address and all existing posters will retain their present identities.

Chairman Steve Lansdown told bcfc.co.uk: "The Forum has, and will continue to, encourage communication between supporters all over the world.

"It has helped give birth to a number of offshoot forums and supporters groups, of which the Supporters Trust is one such organisation.

"It makes sense that the Forum is looked after by the fans, for the fans, and we are delighted that the Trust have agreed to take on this responsibility, which is part of our wider aim to involve more and more supporters in the running of the club."

If you would like to join the Supporters Trust please visit bristolcityst.org.uk.

[Guest Cary Grant supported City]

You can just imagine Lansdown running away from the Club now with no fear of having to read about the Fans slagging him off on the forum!!.

First the ground is seperated from the Club, now the forum!.

You just wonder whats going to happen next!!.

[Guest mnporter2001]

what a shower of ######*t the whole club is going to rat poo and it seems no one cares about the fans,we will just be ignored now sl will answer questions through the new forum my arse so when we have problems now ie new city badge,crap quality shirts etc where shoud we go and voice our opinion lansdown and lambert etc !!!!!!!!!!!!

the end is near and i don't like this new stadium business split one bit that has trouble writen all over it

:@ :@ :@

[Guest HambrookRed]

To be fair, as i am, not many clubs have a link to their "Fans Forum" on their website like we do, I contantly look at other clubs sites to see what the fans are talking about and have to google it to find the URL. We were just lucky before and now we are folllowing what others are doing....

It's still here, same people, same opinions so not really much changing !

[rayer]

So can we still use the live chat as well on some matches ?

[Moth Eaten Pillow]

what a shower of ######*t the whole club is going to rat poo and it seems no one cares about the fans,we will just be ignored now sl will answer questions through the new forum my arse so when we have problems now ie new city badge,crap quality shirts etc where shoud we go and voice our opinion lansdown and lambert etc !!!!!!!!!!!!

the end is near and i don't like this new stadium business split one bit that has trouble writen all over it

:@ :@ :@

Why the anger, surely these forums are better if there run independantly? I think your making a big fuss over what is pratically a simple swap over.

[gazareth]

So can we still use the live chat as well on some matches ?

I'm sure that will be the case.

--

IMO it's not that big a deal. The Supporters Trust will be in regular contact with the club and they will be in the ideal position to report on the issues that the fans are concerned about if they are moderating and running the new forum.

[rednotblue]

what a shower of ######*t the whole club is going to rat poo and it seems no one cares about the fans,we will just be ignored now sl will answer questions through the new forum my arse so when we have problems now ie new city badge,crap quality shirts etc where shoud we go and voice our opinion lansdown and lambert etc !!!!!!!!!!!!

the end is near and i don't like this new stadium business split one bit that has trouble writen all over it

:@ :@ :@

You're an idiot. IF you have problems like poor quality or issues about the club. You can WRITE A LETTER or telephone the Club.

And if we all feel stongly about something suely all we do is set a thread up everyone adds there name and then some clever person sorts it and presents it to the club. Oh like the SUPPORTERS TRUST.

Or are you having a go at Steve L as you got out of bed the wrong side??

[jimtastic]

With the number of cynical, clueless muppets on here, I can't say I'm surprised.

It was either that or rename the SL forum to "Bitch at SL"

[Moth Eaten Pillow]

You're an idiot. IF you have problems like poor quality or issues about the club. You can WRITE A LETTER or telephone the Club.

And if we all feel stongly about something suely all we do is set a thread up everyone adds there name and then some clever person sorts it and presents it to the club. Oh like the SUPPORTERS TRUST.

Or are you having a go at Steve L as you got out of bed the wrong side??

To be fair mate I think some people just like to moan for the sake of it.

[Nogbad the Bad]

I'm sure that will be the case.

--

IMO it's not that big a deal. The Supporters Trust will be in regular contact with the club and they will be in the ideal position to report on the issues that the fans are concerned about

Or keen forum member Badger might tell them direct?

[Guest]

I personally think this forum could be all the better for it.

Those people who've been around on OTIB for years will remember back when PTV first came in and took over. They insisted that the club remove links to this forum and have a sepearate system.

For 9 months, this forum was the best it ever was. There were no trolls from other clubs and every topic was a great read.

We might get back to that, who knows?

With the link and association to the club gone it may be a little lax on here anyway.

More moderators to come on board and help out myself is going to be great, and the stupid topics will get dealt with far more efficently allowing us to debate the real topics.

As far as we at Clik are concerned, nothings realy changed and to reasure people your Data is safely stored under our ownership, so if anyones worried that you email addresses are going to be pooled for use by the ST. I can assure you, on Clik's behalf, that they are not, it would have massive issues with the DPA for starters!

If anyone has any concerns, drop me a PM/Email

The future looks bright, the future is still Red

[Guest mnporter2001]

You're an idiot. IF you have problems like poor quality or issues about the club. You can WRITE A LETTER or telephone the Club.

And if we all feel stongly about something suely all we do is set a thread up everyone adds there name and then some clever person sorts it and presents it to the club. Oh like the SUPPORTERS TRUST.

Or are you having a go at Steve L as you got out of bed the wrong side??

i may be a lot of things but an idiot I'm not!

i am anoyed with the way the club is being run at the moment recently we have had problems like club badges,poor quality shirts,new stands and buy a brick which isnt happening,people being made to move seats then more people being made to move seats only this time with reconpense what about the first lot,then we have season tickets well there was no point me buying my kids one this year cause it will work out cheaper not to and mine isnt worth much of a discount with all the match schems and discounts being given now,the list of bad pr is endless for this season and the forum is just another bad pr move especially the timing,with the above mentioned and the fact we are not sitting pretty in the league.

and this stadium split is the start of bad things it will be sold of bit by bit untill we own no ground and end up like the blue side of bristol.......

I'm sorry if you don't like the way i feel but at the end of the day i am pasionate about BRISTOL CITY if that is bad thing then we are all doomed

[Guest]

the forum is just another bad pr move

And you think being associated with some of the topics on here has been good in the past for BCFC?

I bet BTC loved the topics back in the summer for starters

[jimtastic]

As far as we at Clik are concerned, nothings realy changed and to reasure people your Data is safely stored under our ownership, so if anyones worried that you email addresses are going to be pooled for use by the ST. I can assure you, on Clik's behalf, that they are not, it would have massive issues with the DPA for starters!

I did wonder if you guys were being done out of a job. Glad to hear that isn't the case

[Guest mnporter2001]

And you think being associated with some of the topics on here has been good in the past for BCFC?

I bet BTC loved the topics back in the summer for starters

point taken

there is obviously good and bad to this

i just think it is and easy option for s.l to distance imself from some real issues ie this stadium split and yes the pratts which post rubish in his forum aswell

of which i am not...

[Guest Cary Grant supported City]

Let's just make up our own "Ask Steve" forum, after all, we all know 99% of the time what his replies were going to be!!.

We could ask the next poster on to provide a humorous reply!!

[jimtastic]

Let's just make up our own "Ask Steve" forum, after all, we all know 99% of the time what his replies were going to be!!.

We could ask the next poster on to provide a humorous reply!!

Your comments are noted.

[Moth Eaten Pillow]

point taken

there is obviously good and bad to this

i just think it is and easy option for s.l to distance imself from some real issues ie this stadium split and yes the pratts which post rubish in his forum aswell

of which i am not...

You sure? I'm sure you posted something last week about you expecting Cardif to come over to cause trouble on Saturday.

[Guest mnporter2001]

You sure? I'm sure you posted something last week about you expecting Cardif to come over to cause trouble on Saturday.

that was posted in this forum and in reply to another post.

it basicaly read i had concerns about thaking my children to the match for obvious reasons and was also aware that cardiff had no match and some could come over for some trouble.

i see nothing wrong in my post as it happens it all seemed to go off peacefully but as a farther i had concerns!

so you tell me what is the problem there.

[jimtastic]

that was posted in this forum and in reply to another post.

it basicaly read i had concerns about thaking my children to the match for obvious reasons and was also aware that cardiff had no match and some could come over for some trouble.

i see nothing wrong in my post as it happens it all seemed to go off peacefully but as a farther i had concerns!

so you tell me what is the problem there.

God, let's not turn this into another muck throwing thread, eh?

[Moth Eaten Pillow]

that was posted in this forum and in reply to another post.

it basicaly read i had concerns about thaking my children to the match for obvious reasons and was also aware that cardiff had no match and some could come over for some trouble.

i see nothing wrong in my post as it happens it all seemed to go off peacefully but as a farther i had concerns!

so you tell me what is the problem there.

It was never going to happen, there's no way on this earth Cardiff would come over. Maybe they would have stopped by had the been coming back from London or Reading but even then the chances were remote, OB would have stop them on route.

[Guest mnporter2001]

It was never going to happen, there's no way on this earth Cardiff would come over. Maybe they would have stopped by had the been coming back from London or Reading but even then the chances were remote, OB would have stop them on route.

i didnt know that !

i don't know how the voilent morons work !

i was just concerned for my kids

[Guest Ron]

i just think it is and easy option for s.l to distance imself from some real issues ie this stadium split and yes the pratts which post rubish in his forum aswell

of which i am not...

I think you'll find you are

Sorry I'll go again now

[gater2]

I wonder how many other clubs have taken this step...?

[Moth Eaten Pillow]

i didnt know that !

i don't know how the voilent morons work !

i was just concerned for my kids

Ok no problems there then.

[Antman]

Ok no problems there then.

Oi! Ladies....Take it outside.

I wanted a decent discussion on if people think SL is distancing himself from the fans or not, not handbags at 10 paces.

I would argue he is, his moves of late have shown increasing irritation with other peoples opinions as to the events over the last few months & years.

I'm not a fan of his. I think he has a lot to answer for in terms of the choices of how this club has been run.

That doesn't mean he should be booted out or that I'm not grateful for his financial backing.

His little tantrum about taking his money away before was a signal that he doesn't like the focus of critical attention. However these arguments are diluted by some of the sheer dross and teenage babble that gets put on here.

This forum has been a shadow of itself for a long time, witness the lack of the old guard posters who were at least capable of discussing events.

We don't all have to agree, but we do all need to think about what we post.

[Guest mnporter2001]

Oi! Ladies....Take it outside.

I wanted a decent discussion on if people think SL is distancing himself from the fans or not, not handbags at 10 paces.

I would argue he is, his moves of late have shown increasing irritation with other peoples opinions as to the events over the last few months & years.

I'm not a fan of his. I think he has a lot to answer for in terms of the choices of how this club has been run.

That doesn't mean he should be booted out or that I'm not grateful for his financial backing.

His little tantrum about taking his money away before was a signal that he doesn't like the focus of critical attention. However these arguments are diluted by some of the sheer dross and teenage babble that gets put on here.

This forum has been a shadow of itself for a long time, witness the lack of the old guard posters who were at least capable of discussing events.

We don't all have to agree, but we do all need to think about what we post.

this is similar to what i said at the start but i got blasted for it

[Guest nickD]

This forum has been a shadow of itself for a long time

i think we can all 100% agree on that.

[Guest Cary Grant supported City]

the link on the City site takes you to the Supporter's Trust Forum!!.

[Jay]

the link on the City site takes you to the Supporter's Trust Forum!!.

The link on the main site takes you to the Supporters Trust front page. This page has a link to the Supporters Trust forum & the Supporters Trust main site. If you access the main site, there is a link to otib on there.

[Guest Ron]

the link on the City site takes you to the Supporter's Trust Forum!!.

Sorry to make another post

The wording on the home page says "The BCST Forum" - OTIB is not the BCST forum, it is the Fans forum. A link to otib can be found inside the website, which you can get to by clicking on the "enter" image on the home page.

On consultation I've now removed the link to the BCST forum on the splash page

[cider head]

Sorry to make another post

The wording on the home page says "The BCST Forum" - OTIB is not the BCST forum, it is the Fans forum. A link to otib can be found inside the website, which you can get to by clicking on the "enter" image on the home page.

hmmm so why the logo change

[Guest]

hmmm so why the logo change

Because the old one said official fans forum

[Guest purple_monkey_dishwasher]

The wording on the home page says "The BCST Forum" - OTIB is not the BCST forum, it is the Fans forum. A link to otib can be found inside the website, which you can get to by clicking on the "enter" image on the home page.

You may want to make the website less wide. It doesn't work so well on a 800x600 resolution...

Sorry, I'm a pedantic web developer.

[Guest Ron]

You may want to make the website less wide. It doesn't work so well on a 800x600 resolution...

Unfortunately if anything I'm going to have to make it wider...

But I'll put a note on the splash page, ta mate

[gazareth]

Unfortunately if anything I'm going to have to make it wider...

But I'll put a note on the splash page, ta mate

You should make it so that it works in lower resolutions... it would be unprofessional to do anything else.

Don't see why you need to make it wider either - there's loads of blank spaces on that page to work with.

And Oh God you're using tables

[rednotblue]

i may be a lot of things but an idiot I'm not!

i am anoyed with the way the club is being run at the moment recently we have had problems like club badges,poor quality shirts,new stands and buy a brick which isnt happening,people being made to move seats then more people being made to move seats only this time with reconpense what about the first lot,then we have season tickets well there was no point me buying my kids one this year cause it will work out cheaper not to and mine isnt worth much of a discount with all the match schems and discounts being given now,the list of bad pr is endless for this season and the forum is just another bad pr move especially the timing,with the above mentioned and the fact we are not sitting pretty in the league.

and this stadium split is the start of bad things it will be sold of bit by bit untill we own no ground and end up like the blue side of bristol.......

I'm sorry if you don't like the way i feel but at the end of the day i am pasionate about BRISTOL CITY if that is bad thing then we are all doomed

I never said being passionate about Bristol City was a bad thing. It is fantastic that you are.

My point is that although ultimately Steve L is the chairman, things like the poor quality shirts, or seat moving, season tickets is the responsibility of someone else within the football club.

Who that is I'm afraid I don't know, however if you don't get a satisfactory respone from said persons then yes of course you should go up the hierarchy.

For example if you buy a new car and its rubbish you complain to the dealership, you don't write to the MD of the car company

As for the stadium do you know it is going to be sold off or just speculating. This has been highlighted before and we have been told that by having it as a seperate profit centre will enable people to see what revenue the ground is making and areas which can be improved.

If the ground is sold I will happily eat my City Shirt

[Guest OmegaSnake]

its not on the site anymore, theyve just moved it to the supporters trust site

[WTFiGO!?!]

Personally, I just don't think it reflects well on the Club officials.

No foreign trolls has got to be a bonus if it proves to be true as I was happily openly hostile towards them if they:

A)Failed to make reasoned intelligent comment

or

B)Failed to humour me

and most definately

C)If they were rude in any way to our Club.

[Guest purple_monkey_dishwasher]

You should make it so that it works in lower resolutions... it would be unprofessional to do anything else.

Don't see why you need to make it wider either - there's loads of blank spaces on that page to work with.

I agree. The website is probably going to be the ST's biggest source of publicity and many people's first point of contact with you. If you don't do it right you won't give a good first impression or look professional. I'm not having a go at you Ron, this is an attempt to be constructive, honest!

And Oh God you're using tables

I must admit I'm still a table user myself I know it's wrong, I know it's bad, I have learnt how not to, but I'm too lazy to do it any other way...

[Guest stfc_dave]

It was bloody ridiculous of the powers that be to make it official anway.

Ooooh the big bad internet... not everyones going to say what they want to hear.

[Guest Ron]

I agree. The website is probably going to be the ST's biggest source of publicity and many people's first point of contact with you. If you don't do it right you won't give a good first impression or look professional. I'm not having a go at you Ron, this is an attempt to be constructive, honest!

I don't dispute that and I'm grateful that people are trying to help! I will certainly look into it now as the I've ironed out all of the bugs in the site...for now

[Nibor]

I don't think being unofficial will do anything except make the forum better.

I would like to know how the new mods are to be selected?

Nibor

[RedTop]

My point is that although ultimately Steve L is the chairman, things like the poor quality shirts, or seat moving, season tickets is the responsibility of someone else within the football club.

I disagree. As chairman, SteveL must take responsibility for the shirts, the seat-moving and season tickets. It is SteveL's job to ensure such things are got right because:

1. Shirt sales represent a major stream of income, particularly at a time when there is little other income (summer). He should be overseeing this to make sure he is happy with the quality of the shirts, the price and the design.

2. The moving of fans to new seats is an important part of customer relations. He knows that it affects not only those who are moved, but how the rest of the fans perceive their relationship with the club and how the club sees them.

3. As with shirts only more so, season tickets represent not only a huge income but also an important point of interaction on which fans measure their satisfaction in dealing with the club.

As such, all three are key elements in the club's running and must fall to SteveL to mastermind. If he is not happy with how they have turned out - and in all three cases stated above mistakes have been made, in my opinion, so he shouldn't be - then it is up to SteveL to ensure that those who made errors which were passed up the line and ended on his desk understand what it is that he is unhappy about. That way he is less likely to be put in a position where he is again forced to defend inferior quality shirts, an enforced move of fans that required some rapid tap-dancing to salvage, and misleading information being given to supporters about why tickets are price the way they are. All three issues have undoubtedly harmed the relationship between the club and supporters, which is a pity, though I suspect this has been exacerbated by people using them as a surrogate outlet for their frustrations at on-the-field failures.

In my opinion SteveL has done a lot of very positive things for our club that he can be proud of. The most important, without going through a list, being that a manager of our club can never claim he has not been given the resources to get us out of this division. I do not doubt his loyalty to the cause, his determination to do the best for the club or his financial or emotional commitment, and I think frankly he has been a victim of a minority who have abused his own readiness to talk to fans as openly and as often as possible - certainly far more than any previous chairman. I, like you Rednotblue, trust SteveL absolutely not to sell the ground from beneath our feet or leave us bankrupt. And frankly, some of the abuse aimed at him on here is not only unjust but reflects badly on those who make it.

But there are elements which could be improved. It is SteveL's job to make those improvements, and the first step is for it to be recognised that it is his responsibility to ensure they happen. What message does it send if we suggest these issues are not important enough to be worthy of the chairman's personal attention and expertise?

Sure, the work needs to be delegated because he is not an executive chairman. But he must oversee key issues like the shirts closely to ensure that the club's principal customers - us - are kept happy and, as a result, spend more of our cash with the club rather than on the copious alternatives competing for the consumer pound.

As for this forum being transferred away from the club...well, frankly it's gone to the dogs to the extent that it's mainly populated by people who can't even be bothered to check their spelling, let alone think out cohesive arguments. Its best days are long gone, sadly. It's a pity because there are still a few posters on here who attempt reasoned discussion. However, some of the unthinking abuse aimed at the chairman on this thread is a classic example of why SteveL must get frustrated reading it and why the club would not wish to be associated with it. As a forum for fan discussion, it seems to me that the Supporters' Trust is a logical home for the website. Quite where that leaves those who fundamentally disagree with the BCST and wouldn't wish to use it, I don't know, but I doubt there are few of them and perhaps www.rivals.net will suit their cause instead.

[Dave L]

Hopefully the disestablishment of this forum might be the thing that saves it. At the moment it's disappearing down the pan faster than a mutton vindaloo the morning after the night before, with levels of debate that make Chantelle look like a possible contender for Brain of Britain, and all the levels of wit and erudition that you'd expect in a playground full of eight year olds.

Back when this forum started, before it became the 'official forum' it was a lively, unmoderated place, which was policed entirely by its members. Certain rules applied: no personal abuse, attack the post by all means, but not the poster, and a willingness to have a debate about issues, even when there were violent disagreements (and there often were). Sometimes people overstepped the mark, but I don't remember anyone being 'banned', and disputes were usually forgotten as we all moved on to debate other things.

I absolutely understand why a level of moderation was deemed necessary when the forum was taken under the club's 'official' wing, but I don't think it's done anything for the level of debate on here.

When people get banned, sometimes they come back determined to undermine the system, get their own back and come up with some other controversial statement, secure in the knowledge that after another short ban they'll be back again, spouting the same old billhooks. Threads are killed before they can develop by touchy, over-sensitive souls who can't stand it when someone disagrees with them, and so resort to personal abuse aimed at the person who has dared to hold an opposite point of view to theirs. People make up stuff, post stupid rumours, tell lies and generally reveal a serious lack of knowledge about football, and an even smaller understanding of debating skills, good manners and life in general.

Because of the 'official' status, some people also make the mistake of thinking that their point of view should somehow be taken up by the club, however bizarre or extreme it might be. There seems to be an expectation amongst some that Steve Lansdown, Colin Sexstone et al have nothing better to do with their time than wade through pages of ill thought-out, poorly argued, badly spelled rants masquerading as constructive opinion.

A degree of independence can only be a good thing. Nothing could be worse than what we have now.

[richieb]

Threads are killed before they can develop by touchy, over-sensitive souls who can't stand it when someone disagrees with them, and so resort to personal abuse aimed at the person who has dared to hold an opposite point of view to theirs. People make up stuff, post stupid rumours, tell lies and generally reveal a serious lack of knowledge about football, and an even smaller understanding of debating skills, good manners and life in general.

Spot on Dave.

If the cap fits.

Oh, didn't you forget the 'self importance' tag ??

[WTFiGO!?!]

Redtop, I don't have a problem with incorrect spelling as long as the word in question can be understood.

What is/are the argument/s against the BCST?

Also, are you sure you forum oldies are not just looking back at the 'good old days' through rose tinted spectacles?

I think personal insult and abuse is only fair game on non BCFC fans and do not hesitate to use it in the right situation although I'm sure my policy would be hottly contested by many.

[Nibor]

Redtop, I don't have a problem with incorrect spelling as long as the word in question can be understood.

What is/are the argument/s against the BCST?

Also, are you sure you forum oldies are not just looking back at the 'good old days' through rose tinted spectacles?

I think personal insult and abuse is only fair game on non BCFC fans and do not hesitate to use it in the right situation although I'm sure my policy would be hottly contested by many.

I would suggest that being involved in a working party for a supporter's trust doesn't give any indication of whether or not the person in question has the right qualities to moderate a message board.

I've seen message boards with higher traffic than this one killed off by getting into a "them vs us" situation with new moderators, and we really need to avoid that.

The best people to be moderators would IMO be those long time posters on otib that are widely respected, maybe they've worked on some of the other city fansites in the past.

Nibor

[Guest Ron]

You may want to make the website less wide. It doesn't work so well on a 800x600 resolution...

Sorry, I'm a pedantic web developer.

http://www.bristolcityst.org.uk/resdetect.htm

Taken me a while that has

[City Rocker]

Hopefully the disestablishment of this forum might be the thing that saves it. At the moment it's disappearing down the pan faster than a mutton vindaloo the morning after the night before, with levels of debate that make Chantelle look like a possible contender for Brain of Britain, and all the levels of wit and erudition that you'd expect in a playground full of eight year olds.

That OTIB would descend to the depths was inevitable and unavoidable. The following quotes the webmaster of a new music site. He knows where his site's heading because pretty much all internet fora go the same way, eventually........

Like all messageboards, this one will start off slow, then grow into a "Silver" period where new people just as intelligent as the old will add to the bustling community with new thoughts and ideas and great threads and timewasters. This will grow in size and scope (as well as multiple forums), harbouring in a new "Golden Age" where the "old guard" of alpha males and cliques officially gets established, and as time goes on sets itself as a kind of bureacracy, resistant to change and overly-protective of its status.

Then the board will get too big. Idiots, trolls and spammers will show up trying to exploit the community's eclectic atmosphere, and a new guard will try to oust the old guard. Much fighting will ensue. The signal-to-noise ratio will plummet, as it becomes obvious to more than a few that the usefulness of the forum is inversely proportional to how many people there are (one of the internet's greater ironies). People will complain that things have changed while others will counter that nothing has changed, just they have. And in the end it will be like every other attempt at a serious and sensible web community: a trash heap of ignorant human opinion, socially aggressive attention whores and lacklustre attempts at restoring its former glory, when, much like Pandora's Box, it can never be that way again. It will become a bitter, intolerant, hollow shell of its once proud sense of self-worth.

This will probably occur over the span of about two years. Sometimes longer, sometimes shorter, depending on the popularity of the community. It has happened. It will happen. I fully expect it to happen here.

[redrocks]

Threads are killed before they can develop by touchy, over-sensitive souls who can't stand it when someone disagrees with them, and so resort to personal abuse aimed at the person who has dared to hold an opposite point of view to theirs. People make up stuff, post stupid rumours, tell lies and generally reveal a serious lack of knowledge about football, and an even smaller understanding of debating skills, good manners and life in general.

Spot on Dave.

If the cap fits.

Oh, didn't you forget the 'self importance' tag ??

Oh dear.

[BB.]

SteveL is still a registered member. Is he allowed (under the reasons he has pulled his forum) to join in with the rest of us fans in the general forum?

[redrocks]

That OTIB would descend to the depths was inevitable and unavoidable. The following quotes the webmaster of a new music site. He knows where his site's heading because pretty much all internet fora go the same way, eventually........

Nice find CR. Uncanny.

[WTFiGO!?!]

I would suggest that being involved in a working party for a supporter's trust doesn't give any indication of whether or not the person in question has the right qualities to moderate a message board.

I've seen message boards with higher traffic than this one killed off by getting into a "them vs us" situation with new moderators, and we really need to avoid that.

The best people to be moderators would IMO be those long time posters on otib that are widely respected, maybe they've worked on some of the other city fansites in the past.

Nibor

I hear your point entirely.

My question was actually aimed at the existance of the trust not at its moderatoral rights. I guess I am not using the correct thread to ask such a question.

I've not personally seen much action from the mods apart from two removed threads, one to StevieL and another due to utter tastelessness. I also once had a long message put before me about a rather abusive post I wrote in honor of my loathing of Reading FC, but after a wee groval of appology the mods didn't take it any further.

[Guest Ron]

http://www.bristolcityst.org.uk/resdetect.htm

Taken me a while that has

Right now when you click on "Enter" on the front page it goes there and then redirects you...

[Guest purple_monkey_dishwasher]

http://www.bristolcityst.org.uk/resdetect.htm

Taken me a while that has

Good stuff, but you really don't need to do that fancy detection

Just make the top banner and page about 780px wide. That way it will fill up the screen on a low resolution, and still look fine on a higher one.

Tell me to shut up if you want.

[RedTop]

A degree of independence can only be a good thing. Nothing could be worse than what we have now.

Perhaps you are right, Dave. Maybe the independence will be the saving of the forum, and I agree nothing could be worse than what we have now.

The bottom line is that what makes a forum is the quality of the posters. There are some who were awful when they started but learned to use the forum properly and became valued contributors as they matured, so every poster must be given time to develop on the forum as they learn the ropes. But it has now got to the stage where most decent topics and attempts at serious discussion are flooded out and vanish off page one before they can develop. As a result the forum is sinking faster than George Galloway's reputation on Big Brother. There are days when a read of the top page makes the Daily Sport seem high brow.

There are several things, as I see it, that have also contributed to the forum's downfall:

1. The software. This forum has never been the same since we switched to the current format a few years ago. The old program allowed branches of debate to develop, and for users to follow these arguments far more easily than the current linear format, which means that those who can't be bothered to plough through the full thread just post something on the end before reading it all, making it more difficult to pick up an earlier point and develop it. Yes, the current software has got more smileys - whoopee - and I take TomF's word for it that it is less hackable, but ironically this change did more to stifle debate than anything else. One of the best things that could be done in terms of improving debate is for the crap forum software to be replaced with something more suited to promoting and enabling debate, where threads can branch out and individual points can be pursued to their conclusion.

2. Moderation. I am massively and overwhelmingly opposed to censorship on the site. As DaveL said, this used to be a self-moderating forum policed by its members where certain rules of conduct were followed. Sadly, I doubt that would work now as those who would like to engage in genuine debate and intelligent discussion are outnumbered by people intent on trite childish abuse or making libellous accusations wihtout any evidence. However, there is also little doubt that the site is over-moderated and the suspicion has been that this has been abused on occasions. For the site to be credible, it must be open, above suspicion and fair to all users regardless of which side of any argument they are on. And that means no anonymous 'Modmen'. All those who moderate the site should be openly listed on the site as moderators as a matter of course. They hold a position of responsibility and must be seen to act openly and fairly. I have no problem with them posting as well as moderating provided that if a post is modified or removed the name of the moderator is listed along for the reason for its removal/editing.

Personally, I will see how the switch goes and whether those in charge of the forum take the opportunity to make it a more open debating arena before deciding whether to continue to post. If the forum is over-policed, and the quality of the postings does not improve then I'll call it a day I think.

[Guest Ron]

Good stuff, but you really don't need to do that fancy detection

Just make the top banner and page about 780px wide. That way it will fill up the screen on a low resolution, and still look fine on a higher one.

Tell me to shut up if you want.

If you would, I spent an age on that

And it works, so I'm not changing it any more

[Guest]

1. The software. This forum has never been the same since we switched to the current format a few years ago. The old program allowed branches of debate to develop, and for users to follow these arguments far more easily than the current linear format, which means that those who can't be bothered to plough through the full thread just post something on the end before reading it all, making it more difficult to pick up an earlier point and develop it. Yes, the current software has got more smileys - whoopee - and I take TomF's word for it that it is less hackable, but ironically this change did more to stifle debate than anything else. One of the best things that could be done in terms of improving debate is for the crap forum software to be replaced with something more suited to promoting and enabling debate, where threads can branch out and individual points can be pursued to their conclusion..

I can't go in to technicallities, but nothing bar the high end proffesionally written scripts like Invision or vBuilten would cope with the traffic and sheer scale of what this forum now is. We use Invision purely on the basis that its the only proffesionally written script that offers MS-SQL support which is what we are experts on at Clik.

Its not just the hackable stuff, though that is still a major concern its everything that goes with it. text files or industry standard database management, perl or php, I could go on but it's probably too much to for anyone to understand

Like it or not, the old threaded view is disliked and no companys who write forum software care or include it anymore.

There is no likelyhood of the forum software changing, the reason this place is so stable (behind the sceens) is because I have grown up with the software and our boards are actually used as showcases by Invision because of how well they work. We should be proud in a way, but seemingly we are still reminising about the old days again.

Sorry, but this threaded thing gets my back up. Debate is debate and if you want to you can still use it just as efficently as the old DC Boards, you just have to embrace it like any other technology.

[Guest purple_monkey_dishwasher]

If you would, I spent an age on that

And it works, so I'm not changing it any more

Until someone bypasses the front page and misses the detection script

Seriously, it looks good, you just need to tweak the technical issues, that's all. Good luck.

[Guest]

For the site to be credible, it must be open, above suspicion and fair to all users regardless of which side of any argument they are on. And that means no anonymous 'Modmen'. All those who moderate the site should be openly listed on the site as moderators as a matter of course.

Have you even seen moderation on here lately, because if you have I'd love to be directed to it

I would love to open the recycle bin one day to everyone just to see the levels of crap thats currently in it. I would, but I expect half a dozen lawsuits would follow in quick succession.

To maintain and moderate a forum of this level, you need to see if from both sides before even questioning and labelling it over moderated.

[Ian M]

Spot on Dave.

If the cap fits.

Oh, didn't you forget the 'self importance' tag ??

Yep, that's exactly the sort of post that has ruined this forum. Thanks for providing such a timely example.

[Dave L]

You have chosen to ignore all posts from: richieb.

· View this post

· Un-ignore richieb

I presume your post was in reply to mine, but as I've decided not to read anything that you say ever again, I've no idea what you said.

It really is a great feature and has improved my life no end.

[redrocks]

Have you even seen moderation on here lately, because if you have I'd love to be directed to it

I would love to open the recycle bin one day to everyone just to see the levels of crap thats currently in it. I would, but I expect half a dozen lawsuits would follow in quick succession.

To maintain and moderate a forum of this level, you need to see if from both sides before even questioning and labelling it over moderated.

Tom, you need to distance yourself from this kind of thing and not take it personally. It is an observation of the software and the forum, not an attack on you. Everyone knows what a great job you do and I, personally, have nothing but respect for the amount of work you put into the forum.

I do agree with RT though that the old version with the threaded view was better. It might be a pain in the arse to read, but it is an opinion nonetheless. I also preferred the original Star Wars trilogy despite the fact the FX pale in comparison to what can be achieved these days. It's a point of view. You may not subscribe to it, but it is valid nonetheless.

[cider head]

Because the old one said official fans forum

yeah but my point was as ron said if this is the fans forum and not the trust forum

then why is the trust logo on it, i thought they were to moderate this place

2 trust forums????

[Guest]

yeah but my point was as ron said if this is the fans forum and not the trust forum

then why is the trust logo on it, i thought they were to moderate this place

2 trust forums????

Well it was done to show their support.

I'm sure if people really want to complain about it then the ST will listen.

I am amazed that few seem to think the ST Forums ( http://forums.bristolcityst.org.uk/ ) seem to think that is the new home of, well, OTIB

Tom, you need to distance yourself from this kind of thing and not take it personally.

I know what you mean and its a valid point but there is a lot of things that obviously I can't mention that I wish I could sometimes.

If you think this board is over modderated, you haven't seen anything.. trust me

[Guest Ron]

I am amazed that few seem to think the ST Forums ( http://forums.bristolcityst.org.uk/ ) seem to think that is the new home of, well, OTIB

I'll take the blame for that Tom, poor wording on my part

Removed the link from the splash page now though

[cider head]

Well it was done to show their support.

I'm sure if people really want to complain about it then the ST will listen.

I am amazed that few seem to think the ST Forums ( http://forums.bristolcityst.org.uk/ ) seem to think that is the new home of, well, OTIB

fair enough but people will think that if logos are all over the place.

this forum or the trust itself is not a problem but mabe those that were or are to be

behind the scenes on here were suggested to be power mad to run it,

mate a select few know why.

[RedTop]

Sorry, but this threaded thing gets my back up. Debate is debate and if you want to you can still use it just as efficently as the old DC Boards, you just have to embrace it like any other technology.

On the technical aspect, as I said I take your word for it that it is more stable etc.

However, in terms of allowing debate to develop I cannot agree that the software does the job as well as the old software. Having a system that is essentially linear does not allow debate to branch out and members to explore some particular points etc. If you look at how debates developed on the old DC Boards you will see that the current system just is not as versatile and does the job poorly.

For instance, the only way to refer to an earlier point is to cut and paste it. If someone wants to develop that point further, they then have to do the same again. In the meantime, half a dozen people have posted about something else in between developing another point and it becomes a complete mishmash which is hard to follow, let alone simultaneously develop different aspects on.

It's not a question of embracing the technology. I've done that. It's a case of one piece of software doing something better than another. In terms of what it did, the old software was far better. But in terms of how it did it, it seems it was not as good. I guess it's the digital equivalent of Beta vs VHS! We may not be able to use the old software, and it may be better from a security point of view and in terms of how you control it, but that doesn't mean the current software does the job as well for the end user.

Have you even seen moderation on here lately, because if you have I'd love to be directed to it

I would love to open the recycle bin one day to everyone just to see the levels of crap thats currently in it. I would, but I expect half a dozen lawsuits would follow in quick succession.

To maintain and moderate a forum of this level, you need to see if from both sides before even questioning and labelling it over moderated.

In a moment that causes me great personal difficulty and discomfort, I find that I have to agree with Redrocks. This is not at all personal, Tom. Not only do you obviously do a good job, but you are an example of how it should work in every case. You moderate, people know you moderate, and you post too.

I am quite sure there is plenty of rubbish that is taken out, and that this is seen as a benefit for us all, but the problem is that every time a moderator moderates someone they can claim they are being censored, so it really should be used as sparingly as possible - if ever. As far as I'm concerned, on a forum where space is not an issue in the same way as it is in a newspaper, the only reason to remove or edit a post is if it is potentially libellous, is in contempt of court, is foul and abusive or racist. If it doesn't fall into those categories, then allowing stuff we might prefer to take out because it appears unstimulating is the price we pay for freedom of speech.

One classic example of over-moderation that comes to mind from personal experience, since you ask for an example, was my post a while ago on Junior Agogo being arrested. Even though there was no reason why the player could not be named and why we could not hold a debate on it within legal guidelines, any attempt to post the name within the bounds of a reasoned discussion was immediately censored, even though it was repeatedly explained that such details in the public domain and fell within the realms of what could legally be discussed. Given that Agogo was a star player at the time, his name was essential in order to conduct a discussion of the possible repercussions for the club and how they should handle the matter etc. Yet it was censored. I'm sure others will be able to cite other examples, but as someone who has always tried to post responsibly and within the rules of the forum this is one I had direct experience of.

At the same time, a moderator hiding behind the anonymity granted to him took great pleasure in banning another member whose views he disagreed with. I know this because the moderator involved told me privately what he had done, as you know Tom. Until that point I had not even known he was a moderator. As much as I might sympathise with the moderator's personal viewpoint and disagree with that of the person banned, I found the entire principle insupportable and felt the victim had been entirely unfairly treated. It is to prevent a repeat of that episode that I believe every moderator should be openly listed on the site and identified in the way that you and Adam are. Like DaveL, I also don't recall forum users being banned before, yet the forum seemed to work well enough without it. It creates martyrs and again can be open to abuse unless everything is not only done, but seen to be done.

Like I said, none of this is personal Tom. It is a debate about the boundaries governing this site and how it should be run in the future.