solo1bc Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I think Malone should do it....just for a laugh!It would be chaos! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTFiGO!?! Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 oakily doakily Luke had just landed his X-Wing in the swamp again and I was consumed by the dark-side for a moment. I'm getting fed up with these impetuous fools Obi-Wan keeps sending me.Finally lost it I appear. Rest I need! Yoda, our full support you have. I think Malone should do it....just for a laugh!It would be chaos! That would definately help to liven the old place up!There's one or two other candidates I could propose also.I've always thought you actually need a fruitcake or two at the helm of any organisation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rednready Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Firstly the buck stops with SL, his ask SL forum had been over run with rants and stupidity. The OTIB forum was openly critical of SL'S stewardship in many posts. Why should he pay for personal abuse ? This way he relieves himself of some irritation. He needs our love. Moderating a forum is not about being a clever computor geek, not about website construction, not about passion for bcfc. Its about litigation, the laws of libel, common sense and some insite into lifes experiences. Getting quality ST members with the time and ability will be the trick. Ideally, members with some maturity, knowledge , achievement and above all, integrity would be ideal. The question being , do the unelected or nominated moderators now in place meet those standards. If they do, then we are fortunate to have the benefit of their lifes experiences. We need such individuals to help operate a forum which can be open to libellous situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazareth Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I think this entire thread can be summed up in one simple image: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StapleHillPhil Posted February 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 The moderating is being done voluntarily by a few fans who are currently involved with helping establish the Trust. It also is being moderated by Tom and Geoff. I can't recall the full list of moderators at present, but nobody will be anonymous. I personally would welcome other offers of help here to help run websites and forums. TR,Can a list of moderators be provided asap. I don't think it takes a genius to work out that many people will be rather annoyed to learn that moderator status has been given to one or two particular individuals.Thanks,Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayer Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I think this entire thread can be summed up in one simple image: didnt know Bob Monkhouse was such a fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatcham red Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 TR,Can a list of moderators be provided asap. I don't think it takes a genius to work out that many people will be rather annoyed to learn that moderator status has been given to one or two particular individuals.Thanks,PhilOf Course.Pinned topic addresses this and other questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtg Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Pinned topic addresses this and other questions. Wow look at that maybe the world's not going to end after all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DrFaustus Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 As my application for team manager was declined in an abrupt manner, I would like to offer to be a moderator. This will involve me doing whatsoever other than deleting all TinnionForEngland posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazareth Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 As my application for team manager was declined in an abrupt manner, I would like to offer to be a moderator. This will involve me doing whatsoever other than deleting all TinnionForEngland posts. I second this motion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NailseaRed Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 great more mods! just what we need! more people to spy on my pms, allegedly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinky Gems Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Surely there wont be an increase in moderators, the responsiablity has just been given to a new group of people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucksred Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 i feel it should go to geoff and tom of click with what i'd call the old school postersof mabe edson, redtop, cheshire_red and co. but that's my opinion.Spot on Ch, possibly yourself too. mebbe the Gliders as well.I'd be very grateful for an answer to the following questions:Why was there no consultation with the 4000+ users of otib before the small number of people on the working party decided to take it on?Why was there no consultation on selecting moderators?Why were some posters secretly given moderator rights before any announcement was made?NiborExactly.I suggest that any ST Trust Committee members (or however you are named) lay off this for a while and quickly consult as to how to answer these questions and have 1 spokesperson. I'm worried that this PR disaster is a prelude as to what is to come.Horrified.Agree 1000%. Clarity, and transparency is needed here, pronto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Of Course.Pinned topic addresses this and other questions. It doesn't answer many of them however.Why did the ST take it upon themselves to agree to running OTIB and appointing moderators without consulting OTIB users?Why were some people who are not in the list of moderators shown in the pinned topic given moderator status in secret before any announcement?However it's dressed up now, the way this was handled has severely damaged my trust in the ST, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Agreeing to do things cloak and dagger as SteveL asked was an extremely stupid move.Nibor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazareth Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 It doesn't answer many of them however.Why did the ST take it upon themselves to agree to running OTIB and appointing moderators without consulting OTIB users?Why were some people who are not in the list of moderators shown in the pinned topic given moderator status in secret before any announcement?However it's dressed up now, the way this was handled has severely damaged my trust in the ST, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Agreeing to do things cloak and dagger as SteveL asked was an extremely stupid move.NiborSome people are annoyed by the fact that the changes to otib in conjunction with the ST have been kept to a low-profile. It was at the request of the Club that this was done. The ST does not wish to hide anything from its members or potential members. We will gladly address your concerns/questions on the ST forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richwwtk Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 However it's dressed up now, the way this was handled has severely damaged my trust in the ST, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Agreeing to do things cloak and dagger as SteveL asked was an extremely stupid move.Exactly, to the point where I am now offended whenever I see a post from a member of the ST claiming to speak for 'the fans' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Some people are annoyed by the fact that the changes to otib in conjunction with the ST have been kept to a low-profile. It was at the request of the Club that this was done. The ST does not wish to hide anything from its members or potential members. We will gladly address your concerns/questions on the ST forum.That doesn't answer the question Gazareth.It says the club requested it. It does NOT say why the ST agreed to it instead of telling the club to consult OTIB which would have been the correct course of action.Nibor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazareth Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 That doesn't answer the question Gazareth.It says the club requested it. It does NOT say why the ST agreed to it instead of telling the club to consult OTIB which would have been the correct course of action.NiborOh OK, fair point. Perhaps the ST did not want to risk sullying relations with the club at such an early stage in its development? Just a guess. It does seem odd.Then again, look at it this way. If the club is not going to pay for the hosting of the forum anymore, someone will need to do it. What other option is there for this other than handing over running to the ST? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Oh OK, fair point. Perhaps the ST did not want to risk sullying relations with the club at such an early stage in its development? Just a guess. It does seem odd.Then again, look at it this way. If the club is not going to pay for the hosting of the forum anymore, someone will need to do it. What other option is there for this other than handing over running to the ST?I'd suggest that sullying relations with otib is a sillier move.The ST won't be paying for it, they will be trying to make it self sufficient, ie run it from advertising revenue generated from otib. We'll likely see banner ads introduced. If that pays for itself, the question then becomes why the ST think they're more able to run it successfully than for example the people that ran it before it was the official message board.Nibor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SE23Red Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 That doesn't answer the question Gazareth.It says the club requested it. It does NOT say why the ST agreed to it instead of telling the club to consult OTIB which would have been the correct course of action.NiborIt also raises more questions than it answers...Are the ST always going to go about their business in a way that satisfies the club first and the fans second? Are they up to managing communication well enough to ever hope to "Represent the fans in dialogue with the Club"? What else is going on in the name of the supporters that we don't know about?I was asked at the game on Saturday of my views of the ST and I was quite neutral, the last 24 hours have gone a long way to shaping my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple_monkey_dishwasher Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 If that pays for itself, the question then becomes why the ST think they're more able to run it successfully than for example the people that ran it before it was the official message board.NiborWhen was this not the official messageboard? My recollection is that Scott Davidson introduced a forum in about 1997 or 1998, and that OTIB is a direct descendent of that messageboard. There was the brief period when PTV tried to replace it, but apart from that this has always been very much "official". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 When was this not the official messageboard? My recollection is that Scott Davidson introduced a forum in about 1997 or 1998, and that OTIB is a direct descendent of that messageboard. There was the brief period when PTV tried to replace it, but apart from that this has always been very much "official".I am pretty sure that when I started using OTIB which was around 2000ish it had just been adopted as the official forum... I could be wrong though. I am pretty sure it was around before that and was unofficial, which explains why it has it's own domain name which is owned by clik. Some of the old timers on here or Tom could clarify.Nibor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple_monkey_dishwasher Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I am pretty sure that when I started using OTIB which was around 2000ish it had just been adopted as the official forum... I could be wrong though. I am pretty sure it was around before that and was unofficial, which explains why it has it's own domain name which is owned by clik. Some of the old timers on here or Tom could clarify.NiborMaybe it just became official by name then. It was always attached to the official website if I recall correctly. I remember back when the official site banned links to unofficial sites (must have been around 1999), reason being they didn't want to link to something that might portray a negative image of the club. This was rather amusing since they kept the link to the forum with its ranting and swearing and childish behaviour (those halcyon days of yore that people keep going on about never actually existed on this forum....). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhatWill Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 The web site was originally set up by Scott Davidson but I remember it as being fairly independent. Probably due to the fact that there wasn't really any 'official' web sites back in the late 90s. When it moved to otib.co.uk I'd say that was the first time it was proper official. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 When was this not the official messageboard? My recollection is that Scott Davidson introduced a forum in about 1997 or 1998, and that OTIB is a direct descendent of that messageboard. There was the brief period when PTV tried to replace it, but apart from that this has always been very much "official".Katherine is right.Scott (who is the chairman of Clik Ltd, if your wondering where it all ties in) originally came to Geoff about setting up an official site and forum around 1997 (see the registration date for OTIB as a guideline) and orignally we hosted the whole lot. Originally http://forum.bcfc.co.uk brought you here, but as bcfc.co.uk was passed to PTV we took the option to use the otib.co.uk domain instead which had been used previously just to point at http://forum.bcfc.co.uk - that is now reversed as http://forum.bcfc.co.uk will take you to otib.co.uk... are you following, good.. we'll carry on! PTV came in about 2001 and for 9 months they insited that the clubs use their format, and the club supported the two boards until PTV changed the ruling and this place came back to official status.Since then, and the new format (i.e. Invision) I think its fair to say that this board has quadrupled in traffic, members and posts. Even in my two years at Clik, when I first started I used to worry about the forum dealing with four hundred members online, it now rarely has less than that online at any given point of the day!I hope that clears that saga up anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Porter Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Just back from a Trust meeting, which is indeed why nobody has been on here to respond to your questions apart from Ron.OK. So this clearly needs some explanation, so here goes.your not wrong thereThe Trust agreed to take on the running of OTIB for a period of 6 months. The running costs are being met by the club for 6 months, which is the agreed trial period with the club. There is advertising and sponsorship opportunities to raise money to make the forum self funding after 6 months. Noone envisages the site being overrun with advertising, it will be tested first. No Trust members subscriptions will go toward the running of the site. If the trial period doesn't work, there is an option to review the running of the site at 6 months. As previously stated, the club took the decision to close the SteveL forum.what running costs you make is sound like its £0000's which i for one cant understand ok granted i don't know exactly how this all works with the providing company but i have forums of my own and the running cost's are negligable?The moderating is being done voluntarily by a few fans who are currently involved with helping establish the Trust. It also is being moderated by Tom and Geoff. I can't recall the full list of moderators at present, but nobody will be anonymous. I personally would welcome other offers of help here to help run websites and forums.mods well i don't know any of them so cant possibly coment however should you need help with the websites i may be able to offer someThe distinction between the two forums is that OTIB stays exactly as it is, just not "officially" the club's forum. It remains a site for the fans, but now run by the fans. The other forum is used mainly for taking questions and planning trust activities. Thereby is the basic distinction. in future, it is hoped that these types of Trust related questions would be dealt with on the Trust forum, so as not to clog up this forum too much. The exception is clearly tonight, where answers are needed.The question about the working party needs to be addressed. We are a hard working bunch of supporters holding the fort to get the Trust established. Tonight we spent most of the evening working out how a fair and democratic process could be achieved to elect board members in and around May. Details will be released very soon. If new initiatives are to get off the ground, someone has to get on and do something. I would welcome everyone on this thread and others to get involved in a constructive way. Sometimes decisions have to be made. The more fans involved, the wider the representation of fans views.In this instance, nobody has committed any of the Trust's money, just people's time. Any major investment decisions will only be taken after a fully democratically board is elected. All are welcome to run for these positions.Hope this helps.as for the rest of your post i say FAIR PLAY TO YOU ALL your hard work and time spent on the S.T has not gone un-noticed to alot of us thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 running cost's are negligable?Would you like a quote on forum hosting for a board that can get 2m page impressions per month and anything beyond 200GB of bandwidth per month then?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazareth Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 My guess would be in a the region of a few hundred a month? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Rocker Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Out of interest, can anyone please reveal the former forum usernames (if any) of Jay, Chris & Paul C? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fRed Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Also I see that the anonymous ModMen is still a moderator, I thought we were going to know the identities of all moderators :Confused13: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.