R3 presenters' input?

[Karafan]

I was just musing to myself how much I enjoy my daily visits to this forum - and am so pleased it rose out of the ashes of the BBC's misguided belt tightening.

What I do occasionally miss from the old boards, though, was the opportunity to see the presenters RC and AMcG chipping in now & then as the desire struck them. I assume, though I may be wrong, that there could possibly be some official BBC edict preventing their participation in a forum not owned by Auntie (which, if I am correct, is rather a dog-in-the-manger approach).

Of course, they may well look at the forum (in fact I would feel certain that they did) and may even appear under a nom-de-guerre for all we know, but an inability to reveal their identities would make this all rather odd.

What do others think?

Happy New Year all.

[Nick Armstrong]

I was just musing to myself how much I enjoy my daily visits to this forum - and am so pleased it rose out of the ashes of the BBC's misguided belt tightening.

What I do occasionally miss from the old boards, though, was the opportunity to see the presenters RC and AMcG chipping in now & then as the desire struck them. I assume, though I may be wrong, that there could possibly be some official BBC edict preventing their participation in a forum not owned by Auntie (which, if I am correct, is rather a dog-in-the-manger approach).

What do others think?

Happy New Year all.

I agree with what you say. The 'interactivity' to which all in the 'meedjah' appear to aspire, seems to have been snuffed out. It was great when the two you mentioned waded in.

I think Jonathan Swain has contributed here, unless I'm getting muddled on dates, and Alyn Shipton is reasonably regular on the Jass boreds...

If RC or AMcG are here under virtual false beards and sunglasses, I'd urge them to make themselves known.

On a personal note, it gave a little 'frisson' to hear Caliban quoted a couple of times by AMcG on CD Review of a Saturday morning (but that was presumably specifically because it was from the 'official' R3 message board)

[Barbirollians]

Catherine Bott is of course a member .

[Barbirollians]

Jonathan S definitely responded to our BAL thread on Prokofiev 6 - I thought for some reason it was a more recent BAL ( the DEbussy ) but a quick search reminded me that it was the Prokofiev 6

[PJPJ]

I was just musing to myself how much I enjoy my daily visits to this forum - and am so pleased it rose out of the ashes of the BBC's misguided belt tightening.

What I do occasionally miss from the old boards, though, was the opportunity to see the presenters RC and AMcG chipping in now & then as the desire struck them. I assume, though I may be wrong, that there could possibly be some official BBC edict preventing their participation in a forum not owned by Auntie (which, if I am correct, is rather a dog-in-the-manger approach).

Of course, they may well look at the forum (in fact I would feel certain that they did) and may even appear under a nom-de-guerre for all we know, but an inability to reveal their identities would make this all rather odd.

What do others think?

Happy New Year all.

Perhaps they've been put off by the small number of spiteful remarks aimed at them?

[french frank]

Perhaps they've been put off by the small number of spiteful remarks aimed at them?

I think that is certainly the case. Why should they contribute where they feel they are 'not wanted'? I'm not suprised that many people don't venture forth here. To censor every criticism is also not a desirable practice for a moderator. People should always be measured and fair in their comments.

That said, there are a number of BBC staff registered and 'visits' from guests show up regularly from anonymous BBC computers.

We call ourselves 'friends' of Radio 3 and I'm anxious that, even when hugely critical, we are seen as friends. If we weren't 'friends', we could just go away and 'cultiver nos jardins'.

That is also why we (FoR3) like to exercise some control on contributions here. This isn't control-freakery, but the forum, even though most users are not 'registered' as supporters, is seen as being "FoR3". We don't wish to be seen as spiteful, unfair or antagonistic towards BBC staff who work hard, the moreso when those 'outspoken' critics are NOT FoR3 supporters at all. FoR3 policy is clear: to stick to ideas, not to abuse anyone.

The fact that we're right and the BBC is wrong doesn't affect that. Their response to criticism is woeful: disingenuous and illogical. But there, as one of OUR enemies once said: "You may have all the arguments, but it won't do you any good." Very true . The BBC takes no notice of what it doesn't want to hear...

[johnb]

I somehow can't see Erica Jeal being all that eager to join a discussion here following her BAL review.

(Not that she is a Radio 3 presenter as such.)

[Edit] Great to see you active on the forum again, ff. (But don't over do things.)