Old lady dies (see other post)

[Thropplenoggin]

er that has been tried by the BBC with the old bored

'Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!'

[aeolium]

I agree that it would be worth having a separate thread in which people could debate what content, or perhaps what sort of boards they think the FoR3 forum should contain, always allowing that it is a FoR3 forum and those in charge of FoR3 have the ultimate say. It would also be good to have a separate thread on what sort of R3 people would like to see.

If the wide topic remit of Platform 3 is to be retained then I think it would be helpful to have it split into separate boards to isolate political/social/other general discussion areas. Those uninterested in/irritated by/offended by e.g. the political threads could then completely ignore that particular board. Another useful feature - sorry, administrators - would be the facility to mark a thread, or indeed an entire board area, as 'ignore' so that every post appearing there would be automatically marked as read and would not appear in the New Posts display. People uninterested in certain board areas, or certain threads within a board, could then simply see those new posts in threads/boards that they were interested in.

[Pabmusic]

(A pedant writes: This thread should not have been called Old lady dies (see other post). That never made any more sense than it does now.)

I felt happy at the time.

[Quarky]

There seem IMV to be some rather odd conclusions in some of this

What some folk appear to be saying is that

IF for a moment we imagine this whole forum as part of a large city rather than a single destination.....if we go on the bus (or in Caliban's case in the Maserati ) to our concert of Brahms chamber music at the Wigmore Hall we happen to go past a rather noisy pub, inside of which there are 6 people having an argument about the price of cheese (we might also go past some rather "interesting" looking clubs in the arches at Vauxall on the way home ). The fact that in a place we don't choose to go to some people are doing something we find boring , tiresome or even offensive means that we should abandon the whole thing as it's "run it's course" or is becoming "tiresome" etc etc ? Surely if you don't like a scrap don't go to "Fight Club" BUT some people might like to , and they might also sometimes be the same folk who go to Choral Evensong , Death Metal gigs and are paid up members of a home counties golf club !!
"

Ok to an extent Mr. GG: http://openvault.wgbh.org/catalog/nt...-performs-4-33

Clearly people have different ideas of what is music. But let's keep those sound waves impinging on our ear drums at the forefront of thoughts and discussion.

[eighthobstruction]

Sir Velo....if you go into the members list, you will see many posters with only 1, 2 or even 0 post who have been registered for 2 years or more (I wouldn't mind betting that 33% of registered members are thus) if you open their files their messages do not suggest much ,other than one day they had a bit of time on their hands and wanted to deliver just one important sentence to cyber space....Have a good look around the membership files....it does not suggest that people being put off at all....or to be more clear ,'only the few'....

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

I read (lurk) at the Jazz board more than I look at most of the classical threads. I don't feel put-off by any sense the group are cliquish. I feel slightly uneasy that my knowledge is too patchy to contribute usefully. [Julian Sorel]

...never stopped me or ..... ahem .... might i encourage you to just do it?


and any one else who enjoys a dip in the jazz pond ....

one of the rules of discourse that has not been mentioned [to my reading of the thread] so far is that good order depends not just on not attacking others but crucially to not responding to attack or criticism .... one might add that if one can not stand losing an argument then not starting one is good advice ... but it is not just the boring and highly repetitive spats ... i withdrew my thread because of the toxic illegality of what was posted and heaven help us all if the spybots had caught it ... a deluge of retribution could have fallen upon the forum , its members, FoR3, ff &c ... that was sabotage and i was truly shocked ... imv the ding dong of animosity had risen with the death of the old lady to a high pitch and in the fever of dispute other things start to happen; as if permission has been granted for nastiness ....

[Richard Barrett]

I have in the past said as much myself and recommended that all comments are directed to the 'Chair' and, as you suggested, posters avoid speaking one to another

That strategy certainly works brilliantly in the House of Commons, where jeering and intemperate comments are never to be heard.

Really, though, that is a silly idea (note that I say silly idea, not the idea of a silly person). From what I can see, a lot of the nastiness on "political" threads comes from a conflict between those who think he/she who shouts loudest is bound to be right, and those who think that assertions ought to be backed up by a bit of research and an attempt to investigate the facts - the former annoy the latter because, well, it's annoying; and the latter annoy the former who can't be bothered to do the research, are worried about what they may find, or regard their own opinions as trumping any facts. I don't think that would change fundamentally without declaring one subject of another off-limits, and I'm sure there are many of us who wouldn't have much interest in a forum with such restrictions.

[eighthobstruction]

Julien the best way to get a foot in the door is to ask questions....just ask questions....you be happilly surprised I think....shame you were not around when the old beeb JAZZ boards , there were more like 100 posters of the most top quality...

....Incidently there are LOTS of posters who had every chance to come over to this new board 3 years ago (Timmins, Piano Peter) but did not bother ....they just retired to do other things....

[Thropplenoggin]

What about creating the administrative position of a 'superhost', something along the lines of Judge Dredd.

That ought to keep us in line.

[Bryn]

Julien the best way to get a foot in the door is to ask question....just ask questions....you be happilly surprised I think....shame you were not around when the old beeb boards when there were more like 100 posters of the most top quality...

....Incidently there are LOTS of posters who had every chance to come over to this new board 3 years ago (Timmins, Piano Peter) but did not bother ....they just retired to do other things....

Heh, heh. Julien was a stalwart of the old BBC boards.

[Thropplenoggin]

What about a posting limit? Would this lead to more considered use of allocated posts, whether daily or weekly? Hmm.

One thing I have noticed about the online world and its commentariat is that now anything that happens is considered news and, thus, worthy of comment. The Guardian is guilty of this. It's sprawling website, with the blogs and 'Comment is free' section, have trivialised news. Just because you can 'comment' on it (i.e. cobble together an 'article' from Wikipedia, Google et al, and bung it online), doesn't mean you should.

The editorial process is in decline, as each ephemeral scandal - a rogue 'Tweet' from a 'celeb', an MP burping at a press conference, non-existent objects (iPhone 5S, iWatches) being pre-emptively analysed, etc. - is subjected to thirty different pieces covering all possible points of view, including an offended seagull in Clackton-on-Sea, and then each of these p.o.v's, subjected to meta-commentary via the 'comments' section.

The same applies to this forum. Fewer threads of higher quality, rather than a hike in the price of pork pies being discussed.

[Nick Armstrong]

I agree that it would be worth having a separate thread in which people could debate what content, or perhaps what sort of boards they think the FoR3 forum should contain, always allowing that it is a FoR3 forum and those in charge of FoR3 have the ultimate say. It would also be good to have a separate thread on what sort of R3 people would like to see.

If the wide topic remit of Platform 3 is to be retained then I think it would be helpful to have it split into separate boards to isolate political/social/other general discussion areas. Those uninterested in/irritated by/offended by e.g. the political threads could then completely ignore that particular board. Another useful feature - sorry, administrators - would be the facility to mark a thread, or indeed an entire board area, as 'ignore' so that every post appearing there would be automatically marked as read and would not appear in the New Posts display. People uninterested in certain board areas, or certain threads within a board, could then simply see those new posts in threads/boards that they were interested in.

Lots of good ideas on this thread but that all appeals to me in particular, aeolium. There should be room to discuss the weather or pork pies ( Le Nog ...... ) - or, I suppose, politics (although like pabs I'd rather not) - but if people want to focus on the music or the Radio 3 aspect, then they could customise the Forum and blot out the areas they don't want to be drawn into. But is that technically possible?

(And indeed, certain individuals could more easily be banned from certain sections where they appear unable to behave within the rules - as I believe happens now)

[Flosshilde]

What about a posting limit? Would this lead to more considered use of allocated posts, whether daily or weekly? Hmm.

One thing I have noticed about the online world and its commentariat is that now anything that happens is considered news and, thus, worthy of comment. The Guardian is guilty of this. It's sprawling website, with the blogs and 'Comment is free' section, have trivialised news. Just because you can 'comment' on it (i.e. cobble together an 'article' from Wikipedia, Google et al, and bung it online), doesn't mean you should.

The editorial process is in decline, as each ephemeral scandal - a rogue 'Tweet' from a 'celeb', an MP burping at a press conference, non-existent objects (iPhone 5S, iWatches) being pre-emptively analysed, etc. - is subjected to thirty different pieces covering all possible points of view, including an offended seagull in Clackton-on-Sea, and then each of these p.o.v's, subjected to meta-commentary via the 'comments' section.

The same applies to this forum. Fewer threads of higher quality, rather than a hike in the price of pork pies being discussed.

No, I don't think limiting either the number or length of posts would lead to a rise in quality or a reduction in argument; just to a reduction in liveliness. One of the most boring letters pages in a newspaper is that in the (Glasgow) Herald - long-winded, self-important correspondents that mean that there's only room for half a dozen letter. One of the best is the Guardian (& not just because I agree - generally - with it politics) - it has a decent number, usually fairly concise, & has a section of brief (often one-liners) usually witty letters about (usually) trivial matters. (I also think that the Guardian's website is the best designed of those I've looked at)

[Thropplenoggin]

Lots of good ideas on this thread but that all appeals to me in particular, aeolium. There should be room to discuss the weather or pork pies ( Le Nog ...... ) - or, I suppose, politics (although like pabs I'd rather not) - but if people want to focus on the music or the Radio 3 aspect, then they could customise the Forum and blot out the areas they don't want to be drawn into. But is that technically possible?

My chide was more directed at The Guardian than here...I partake of The Refreshment Room with vim. Indeed, were it not for the coffee thread, the virtual world would have been deprived of this peach.

[Nick Armstrong]

My chide was more directed at The Guardian than here...I partake of The Refreshment Room with vim. Indeed, were it not for the coffee thread, the virtual world would have been deprived of this peach.

True! But mention pork pies and I become feral in a protective sort of way!