se23.com - an exile from the north speaks out

[kingfisher]

.

[bigbadwolf]

I say, kingfisher. That's a dash strong.

Anyway...

... his holiness, Father Orton, has got his cassock in a twist over some dubious, unChristian editing over on the se23.com's religion thread:

Wow, a special thread for us anoraks! But relegated to the 'Beyond SE23' division. If someone posted 'Not enough of it (or 'too much of it') in Forest Hill' on the 'Religion' thread, would it get the thread promoted back the premier league?

How queer.

[Rachael]

I do admire SE23's Admin for his ingenuity, though. If a thread starts off on one subject but veers to another, or opens up into a more general discussion, he just chops it up and gives the threads nice, new, 'does what it says on the tin' titles. So, that Religion thread started out as a discussion about the signage outside a local church, and developed into a discussion about what actually constitutes a religion.

'Hullo!' thought SE23 Admin, 'This will be too confusing for my punters! Forum threads musn't be allowed to develop like a conversation! That way anarchy lies!'

Snip, snip with the virtual scissors and he can put each piece, each post if he wants, in the right place.

Come to think of it, maybe he has some sort of OCD.

My current favourite bit of madness: someone started a thread asking us to imagine the Capitol was still a cinema and to name a film from the cinema's glory days we would like to see on the big screen again. That thread was promptly shifted from the SE23 section to the Trading Post, because that is where one goes to discuss 'commercial' issues. Fabulous nuttiness of the highest order.

[bigbadwolf]

My current favourite bit of madness: someone started a thread asking us to imagine the Capitol was still a cinema and to name a film from the cinema's glory days we would like to see on the big screen again.

Ahhh, Dunny.

Your late arrival on se23.com leads one to assume you've never encountered the thread when Forest Hill showed its true colours?

If not, enjoy:

http://www.se23.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=135&page=1

It'll always be my favourite. Every last poisonous entry.

[Rachael]

Enjoy? Not exactly. Sometimes ignorance is bliss.

And can you please stop referring to me as an antipodean lavatory? Put your considerable skills to finding a better term of endearment, or I shall have to come and pull your tail.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[michael]

The idea of splitting out postings on a new topic that emerges tangentially (that spelling shouldn't be right) from another thread is perfectly reasonable and practiced on a lot of forums. It helps to keep both topics flowing better and leads to better dicussion of both areas of interest.

I do find the moving of all topics on businesses to the trading post rather annoying. There is a big difference between a discussion on new/existing businesses or bringing back a cinema, to adverts for people wanting to buy/sell a widget.

But all of this would be okay if it were not for the pre-moderation of anybody with anything mildly controvertial to say. All of my favourite posters have ended up in pre-moderation and have left. Not really how to encourage a local forum.

[Rachael]

I hadn't come across the splitting of threads before - I have to say I don't like it much, because it is still editorialising by the moderators, no matter what the intentions. But if it works for other people, that's fine. And thinking about it, it's better than the practice I've seen on another board where threads are just closed down if they range too far from the original topic.

I've been pre-modded myself a few times on SE23. It's never about saying something controversial as such, but about upsetting the status quo. I've never, ever, been pre-modded anywhere else online.

[admin]

I do split threads very occasionally. Threads do tend to drift with a large number of posts and that is OK with me except:

1) Where half the posters have drifted in one direction and half in another. Splitting into two makes reading and responding a darn sight easier.

2) Where an event has changed the nature of a topic which may be of interest to new people which may not appear relevant from the original title. Changing the title of the OP is editorialising I seek to avoid.

Overall it is often too difficult to split cleanly because of embedded quotes and back references which don't make sense in a new thread. So that's why you rarely see it.

Pre-modding - couldn't do that with the old software but I can with the new. Don't tempt me

Admin

[squashst]

I couldn't help but notice that se23.com has been down all day. Which is probably a good thing as what started of on a debate on the regeneration of Forest Hill and also the planned redevelopment, has degenerated into 3 or 4 posters throwing metaphorical brickbats at each other (unfortunately without any wit). It will be interesting to see whether the down-time of se.23 is related to this, or indeed if the admin will allow the threads to continue.

If he does, se23.com could well be on the way for some kind of an award.....

[Rachael]

It still seems to be up if you go directly to a thread, but not if you click the forum button in the top menu.

And yes, lots of pointless mudslinging going on. Annoying because some people with valid points to make have undermined themselves.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[david_l]

So, this is where you've all been, then...

[Rachael]

SE23.com - where the trolls run free but you can't post a thread about a local writers' group without paying commercial rates (£10 per week). And a very polite email explaining that the group is a club, not a business and that although we sell our anthologies, we do so only to cover production costs, goes unanswered. Posting on SE23.com is like childbirth - though I swear I'll never to do it again, I eventually forget how painful it was and do it again.

[mummycat]

..

[Rachael]

I've just noticed that the foresthill.org.uk website is still active and up to date. It looks like a useful resource. I mainly use SE23.com for local information rather than chitchat, so maybe forest hill.org.uk should be my first port of call from now on.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Robin Orton]

I agree that the SE23 site adminstrative machine seems much more impenetrable than the SE26 one. I too have sent emails to their 'admin' and had no reply. Obviously if one were dealing with a commercial organisation or a public service, that would be totally unacceptable. But we're not, are we?

On Ruby Dunlop's point about charging, I often wonder what the business model in fact is for this kind of community forum. I assume they're all non-profit making. But perhaps SE23 and SE26 work in different ways e.g. in the extent to which they use volunteers? Or perhaps this is the sort of question we shouldn't ask.

I suppose one could open a thread on the SE23 site called 'user feedback' or 'questions for Admin' and raise this sort of issue there. (How long it would be allowed to stay open is another matter). But I'm afraid I'm not brave enough to do so. I'm afraid I might have a file opened under my name (perhaps there already is one?) marked 'trouble maker' and that in due course some one would be knocking loudly at my door at 4.00 am...

[Rachael]

I assume our local admins make a modest income from advertising. I also assume that they can earn more from advertising the more traffic they have on the site. The idiosyncratic set up on SE23.com must put people off as they can't find what they are looking for. It's the only forum I've come across that asks local businesses to pay for posting. I know some local business owners - they just don't bother with SE23.com as they aren't prepared to pay. So there is little income for admin that way, plus it is probably driving down traffic as I can't get information from local businesses themselves, just endless (an often inaccurate) speculation from forum members. so advertising revenue is down too.

At least once a week in the past month someone has opened a new thread asking about the new shop besides Sainsburys, not realising there is a long ongoing thread in the Trading Post. How many potential users come in the first place looking for that sort of information and, not finding it in the main forum, wander off again?

Then threads are moved without a marker to alert you. Or they a removed altogether without any communication with the original poster even when that poster is clearly local and a regular user and not a spammer (yes, I am talking about myself).

Ultimately, forums are the fiefdoms of their admins. If the admin of SE23.com doesn't care about generating revenue from the forum, he is going about it the right way.

Rachael

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[admin]

I assume our local admins make a modest income from advertising.]

Oh - how I wish!

A condition of the GoogleAd contract is I cannot reveal the amount they pay. I can say the payments are very modest and go nowhere near repaying for the time and effort of stopping and removing spammers. Nevertheless a welcome contribution and it gives advertisers a legitimate way of advertising to our community. Yep I have a thing about spammers!

Making money from a local website in an area such as ours is a near impossibility unless you design the site specifically to exploit advertising. Neither SE23.com or STF can be said to do that and if we did the result would not be a truly local site with community pretensions.

Which must leave you with the question as to why we support these sites. All I can say is ply me with enough beer at an STF social and you may get an answer. It probably won't make much sense ...

Admin

[Rachael]

Well, I did say a 'modest' income, admin.

I do sometimes wonder why admins commit so much time and effort to their forums (or fora, if you prefer). I certainly don't mind if they make a little money from it. All my griping about SE23.com comes down to frustration, because I think the admin there is stifling the growth of the forum. I don't think that's his intention, but I do think it is the outcome of his unique approach to forum management.

Maybe if the forum next door wasn't such a shining example of how to do it right, it wouldn't bother me so much.

[Tim Lund]

Obviously if one were dealing with a commercial organisation or a public service, that would be totally unacceptable. But we're not, are we?

On Ruby Dunlop's point about charging, I often wonder what the business model in fact is for this kind of community forum. I assume they're all non-profit making. But perhaps SE23 and SE26 work in different ways e.g. in the extent to which they use volunteers? Or perhaps this is the sort of question we shouldn't ask.

Robin, ?Ruby

I'm sure Admin will get back to you on this, and maybe foresthill.org.uk, once he's deleted our friendly not-so-neighbourhood spammers - but here's my take on it, having raised these questions with Admin myself.

First, these forums can and do generate some income ... ah - I see he got in first. So let me now embarrass him by opining that the business model is simply that some people, when they are in a position to do so, will give up some of their time for general civic purposes. Sorry about this rather wooden phrase, but 'serving the community' feels a bit creepy. I also have no problem with such people getting some income from doing so, and I think Google's contractual requirements are a shame - the transparency in the comparable case of local councillors, who get £9,000 a year I think, and £32,000 if a member of the Cabinet, is admirable.

But the main thing is that members of the public should be able to see the good that such people do, which of course involves being ready to respond to criticism. In this I think Admin's management of this site is admirable.

[Rachael]

Tim - Robin has been tring to find out my first name for some time and is trying to provoke me into telling him what it is. Let's see if he notices I have caved to the pressure.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]