Lower Sydenham (removed)

[Annie]

Just want to say I love this forum,I think Admin doe's a great job and I would hate to see anything change,I don't always agree with, for example Bensonby but I believe he has knowledge of the subjects he posts about and for that reason have respect for him,
Please don't bring in too many rules and regulations because I think it would inhibit discussion, Just do what you are doing Admin I think you are very fair in your judgement

[lambchops]

this is a good forum and moderated in an excellent way. i "contribute" to a number of forums, and admin is really good.

with regards to what bensonby said about people failing to respond point by point...that's the most annoying part of internet discussions in my opinion!

[CaptainCarCrash]

From what I have read on this and the original thread it typifies the inherant problems with open forums because you will get an eclectic mix of people some of who are a bit leary.

[Trawlerman]

If a serious opinion or point has been made and it has been justified by evidence then surely any disagreement also should be supported with evidence?

[CaptainCarCrash]

If a serious opinion or point has been made and it has been justified by evidence then surely any disagreement also should be supported with evidence?

I dont think it will help the situation Trawlerman, at the end of the day a post was about riff raff in Lower Sydenham and how one might deal with them I did not think it was totaly PC but I did not think that it should have been removed either . It was'nt that bad so I was slightly shocked by the outcome.

To my mind it was people over reacting, but generalisations can upset people and open forums are full of some very easily offended people, you see a lot worse before during and after the watershed and from what I know about these kind of forums there are just too many cotton wool wrapped complaints.

Just to sum up my two penneths worth then if your going to slate a place expect some rebuttle. Some people will detract and deflect from an argument by pointing out a spelling mistake because they are easy targets and that can upset people. What you do is either make sure you never make a spelling mistake and brushup on your latin skills.

As for the OP I think he will offend, he likes a bit of banter and is quite an intelligent poster but he likes to shock and he can be quite cutting at times and some of it can be quite shocking but if your adult about it I dont think he is that bad and I think he is a bit of a Lenny Bruce in terms of his self sensorship but all in all he appeals to my sense of humour but will upset the God fearing Guardian reading librals you get on forums (Generalisation directed at the place I live) easily done especialy considering some of the people I've met over the past year have egos so large they have their own gravitational field.

[digime2007]

First of all, welcome back Savvygirl.

I'm glad you didn't go running off in a sulk like some people seem to be doing. Incidentally, I don't think there was any intended bullying in that Sugerhill thread. People actually supported your recommendation and encouraged you to keep posting. If you experienced my posts as bullying then please except my apologies.

It does illustrate the nature of internet forums though. People will always be misinterpreted. People will always overreact. People will always stir, quible and take things far too seriously. There's no way of changing that by introducing rules and draconian administration.

I agree with the comments on the other thread about SE23.com. In my opinion that site gets the admin and moderation wrong. This site is so much better for the simple reason that people are allowed to express themselves openly. Admin takes a fairly light touch and I wouldn't want that to change.

What I'm not happy with is the locking and deleting of threads. I accept racist/homophobic/hateful/spam posts should be removed but don't understand why a thread should be locked or removed unless it was the original post that was at fault.

Take the thread about improvements to Sydenham Road. That did take a dubious turn when people started criticising a council employee. In this case I would inderstand removing the posts or a stern intervention from Admin. Instead, the thread was locked and then naturally plummeted from view down the thread list. It's not as if the other comments weren't still valid or the discussion concluded.

I also agree with Bensonby. I think people here are generally pretty good natured. As I said before you can't escape the nature of internet forums and some people will always be put off by that. Things can get out of hand though and that's where the refereeing hand of Admin comes in. I'm more in favour of the occassional stern warning post from Admin that any draconian rules or thread locking.

Finally, although I have a strong opionion on this I'm not saying the forum is getting things wrong. I'm just giving my opionion on what might improve it even more.

[Trawlerman]

OUCH!!...mikecg, I read 'The Grouniad' and I'm positively petrified of G*d.

I was just speaking generally.
Of course those who are trying to be stupidly personally offensive need to be dealt with. On the other hand, in a reasonable debate points made need to be supported.
Generally I think the forum has got the balance about right.
You certainly can't please everybody all the time.

[Thomas]

I think overall the forum is moderated very effectively, especially given that this isn't a big budget site that can afford a big army of moderators. As is the nature of forums, and social media in general, there is a fair bit of rubbish in it (some of it from me) so you do need to set your expectations accordingly - I don't read every thread and really can't be bothered to find out what some people have to say. But outright nastiness is (so far as I'm aware) pretty rare.

The forum though would benefit from having a wider range of contributors, not least from the type of informed community-minded people that Nasaroc mentioned - I can think of quite a few people who used to contribute fairly frequently but now no longer do so and I hope they do return - and I really really hope Nasaroc keeps posting. I also hope Savvygirl hasn't been too put off after posting about Sugahill (she's right - it is a real asset to the area) and that more people stop lurking and start posting - I think those of us who have been posting for some time should remember that people can be a bit put off from starting posting because of the response they might get. It took me a while to stop lurking and start posting, and my first thread got a really odd response, which resulted in Admin locking the thread - but apart from that I've been reasonably pleased with those who have responded to what I've said.

As for www.se23.com I have to say it is a total turnoff - it has a very narrow range of contributors and is really quite dull - who actually reads it? I think if anyone wants to reach out to people in Sydenham then you need to post here and not there.

[ALIB]

The reason Admin has a good technique for moderating is by accident, not design

Does anyone else think he is lazy and spends too much time on holiday ?

And when he is here, he is trying to blag free pints at the STF socials.

Seriously though, it's an awkward job to get right, and by comparison, se23.com is sterile.

[Ulysses]

I agree with Thomas' views in the main.

Regarding the actual post in question from BigBadWolf I must admit I did read it. Whilst I thought it a tad strong and a bit sweeping I saw nothing that would be considered racist (unless of course it was edited by the OP at any point). Lower Lower Sydenham/Bell Green/SavaCentre/New Beckenham - or whatever you like to call the area - is a bit of a blindspot for me so I cannot comment on whether or not the opinions expressed were valid.

What I do know is that I have on many occasions gotten off the train at Lower Sydenham and walked the long walk home through Home Park etc at night and on my own and have never, ever, felt unsafe or under threat.

I did find it odd that the poster was deriding those 'oiks' who were 'acosting' him [his words and spelling] and that he longed for the healthier 'climbs' of Upper Sydenham or Forest Hill...Perhaps on his way to the apparently healthier climes of Upper Sydenham or Forest Hill he might like to visit some of the estates that are there whilst he brushes up on his diction and grammar?

Regarding the moderation of the site I think it strikes the difficult balance about right. I also know of many public-spirited individuals who have ceased to post. They state that too many people view it as a soap-box to moan about things they are not prepared to do anything about! Too many people see it as some sort of Public Service Broadcast purely for them. They come on here and just moan...the negativity can suck the life out of you! But they won't do anything to change it. They want other people to do all the ground-work for them and want to be spoon-fed information regarding things they really should be researching/getting involved in themselves.

There does seem to be little flaming, which is a good thing, but conversely 'without friction, nothing moves'...

[michael]

I saw nothing that would be considered racist

The best thing I can do is probably to point to:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7446274.stm
Which is what I assume caused the problem in the original post that 'insulted people based on their ethnicity'.

Most of the rest of the rantings of BBW were the standard stuff that have made him an exile from EDF and se23.com

[bigbadwolf]

Michael.

Please get your facts straight. I left the se23.com forum for the same reason so many others did. It's boring and run by an utter control freak who sent me baffling messages on the morality of mentioning shops by their trading name, even WHSmiths.

I've been slung off the EDF until the new year for admittedly acting like a bit of a cock. Though lets not forget yours and Steve's telling off's for coming on the EDF to look for threads to mock and deride those living in se22. Such as: "10 reasons not to emulate east Dulwich" on the se23.com site. To which the EDF admin were pretty quick to act. Admittedly, I don't know for sure which one of you was responsible for that particular attack, but what I do know is that on the EDF you were scathingly and personally attacked in such a visious way that if I were on the recieving end of that tirade, I'd probably cry. And that time when a load of Forest Hill dwellers had a thread discussing the possibility that all your hard work and promotion of Forest Hill were in fact a smoke screen to get you elected into local office. A position that many thought you ill equipped and lacking in fortitude.

My original post was wasn't in any way an attempt at stirring up any racial aggrevation, we've got the patrons of the Two Halves for that, but I doubt any of them can read or write let alone have internet connection.

My views of lower Sydenham is that it is what it says: Lower in the sense that it's at the lower end of the social ladder regarding the drunken pond life that stagger between Off-licences and chicken shops. Not the hardworking inhabitants who I respect and who go out of their way to not get in the way of others.

I also admit that my grammar could do with a bit of a 'slap upside the head' but so can many others on this forum.

I also think many of you should seek out Mikecg's wisdom concerning my motives and contributions. He knows me the best (in the on-line sense) and know's my real identity. He also knows that most of my fusillades deserve only the most scant attention before summing them up for what they are. The laments of shit stirring Private Eye devotee.

Take care Sydenham, except lower, obviously.

[michael]

BBW,
I must have missed the personal attack on me on EDF. Usually I go to SE23.com for personal abuse, although STF is a useful source as well.

Personally I would love to see a return of all the exiles from SE23.com, self-imposed or otherwise.

I am sure that your choice of words was not meant to be racists (I will leave it for others to judge whether the link I provided takes you to a racist word or not - there is some debate). Your choice of words was clearly meant to be provokative, although for some reason it has provoked criticism of SE23 than Lower Sydenham. Funny how some threads work.

[CaptainCarCrash]

Do you really really want to go back there BBW? I dont think it will work.

It's up to you I suppose.

I am proud of myself when I think about it, but I dont really want to argue with people on forums anymore just incase the Devil version of me comes out again

Seriously though non Impartiality causes contempt and because of the clique and the ego maniac factor you'll be banned again because you wont be able to help yourself, I know I could'nt and they thrive on it.

When I look back on it I think I was right and I know for a fact a few others think this too.

I thought you may have learned a lesson with regards to base humour and insensetive comments but it appears you still sail close to the wind.

From experience I dont think you can be yourself BBW within the ethos of a formum such as the general chit chat family types unless you can adapt
this is in no way an attack just some advice.

I know I'm still looking for my perfect internet home base but I cant seem to find one with a couple of hundred mikecg's registered.