Messageboard
The Bull permalink
email to 'Feedback'
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Please read and comment before I send it - I'm happy to ammend/add.
Lady M
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New DNA messageboards.
Please don't even think of approaching a Richard Smith to respond to this.
I write from The Archers, but I have looked around various other boards which have been switched to DNA and this seems to be the majority view.
We dislike the lack of 'threading'. Apparently this is to discourage conversation which is potentially dangerous. (If you don't believe me I quote 'In 2005, we revised the format of our message boards to replace the previous threaded system. One of the reasons was because experience suggested that threaded message boards can sometimes encourage a false sense of security or intimacy which may lull some members into revealing personal or private information. Anyone posting a message to our boards should always be conscious of the fact that they are not speaking to a few online friends but making a public statement which could be read by a potential audience of thousands. ')
This may be relevant to Cbeebeies, but an intelligent adult audience of Radio 4 -or any other network - listeners can work this out for themselves.
The 'email me', 'time order' and text formatting options have been removed. There has been no acceptable explanation for this.
The lack of 'email me', as well as the lack of threading, means that it is impossible to know who has replied directly to a post. In TA, 'threads/'discussions' have been christened 'the bog roll' - a quick look will illustrate why this is.
Safety on line - anyone can click on a poster's name and see precisely which 'conversations' to which they are contributing/have started. Cyber stalking has happened in the past, without this facility. I cannot see how this makes anyone safer online. The techies say that it makes finding trolls and sock puppets easier. If this is true (which I doubt) then having this list available only to mods would make no difference and would make posters feel a whole lot safer!
It seems to me that the wishes of the board users are being willfully ignored by the designers. The 'auntie know best - don't worry your pretty little head' culture has finally taken over.
I keep being told that it's my bbc. If it is, the 75% (in one survey - as opposed to the 'many' and 'most' quoted by the web people) of users who do not like the new format are clearly not being in any way represented nor catered for by 'our' bbc. -
Message 2
Posted by 531_tube (U2277782) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
I think you have succinctly stated the view of many Archers board users and most likely other boards as well. Go for it.
-
Message 3
Posted by Bearhug (U2258283) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Cbeebeies -> Cbeebies
-
Message 4
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Thanks, Bear, I'll ammend the typo.
-
Message 5
Posted by KT (U1158731) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Well, as Sam Goldwyn said: Include me out.
Although I am completely satisfied with the new arrangements, going by the comments I have read in ML I think there is a case to be put against them. But I'm afraid I can't see anyone in charge of the ´óÏó´«Ã½ MBs being swayed by the argument as you have put it
Please read and comment before I send it - I'm happy to ammend/add.
Lady M
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New DNA messageboards.
Please don't even think of approaching a Richard Smith to respond to this.
I write from The Archers, but I have looked around various other boards which have been switched to DNA and this seems to be the majority view.
We dislike the lack of 'threading'. Apparently this is to discourage conversation which is potentially dangerous. (If you don't believe me I quote 'In 2005, we revised the format of our message boards to replace the previous threaded system. One of the reasons was because experience suggested that threaded message boards can sometimes encourage a false sense of security or intimacy which may lull some members into revealing personal or private information. Anyone posting a message to our boards should always be conscious of the fact that they are not speaking to a few online friends but making a public statement which could be read by a potential audience of thousands. ')
This may be relevant to Cbeebeies, but an intelligent adult audience of Radio 4 -or any other network - listeners can work this out for themselves.
The 'email me', 'time order' and text formatting options have been removed. There has been no acceptable explanation for this.
The lack of 'email me', as well as the lack of threading, means that it is impossible to know who has replied directly to a post. In TA, 'threads/'discussions' have been christened 'the bog roll' - a quick look will illustrate why this is.
Safety on line - anyone can click on a poster's name and see precisely which 'conversations' to which they are contributing/have started. Cyber stalking has happened in the past, without this facility. I cannot see how this makes anyone safer online. The techies say that it makes finding trolls and sock puppets easier. If this is true (which I doubt) then having this list available only to mods would make no difference and would make posters feel a whole lot safer!
It seems to me that the wishes of the board users are being willfully ignored by the designers. The 'auntie know best - don't worry your pretty little head' culture has finally taken over.
I keep being told that it's my bbc. If it is, the 75% (in one survey - as opposed to the 'many' and 'most' quoted by the web people) of users who do not like the new format are clearly not being in any way represented nor catered for by 'our' bbc. Â -
Message 6
Posted by San Fairy Anneâ„¢ (U2230890) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Yes, please 'go for it' it says it how it is. I really can't follow anything anymore, and I too, am worried that everyone can access the list of items (I refuse to call it conversation any more) one has contributed to. I'm certainly not so daft as not to know that I'm writing a postcard which is pinned up on a notice board, when I post on here. I do resent being treated as my shoe size rather than my age! SFAnne
-
Message 7
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Ken Tun,
I know I'm not speaking on behalf of the 25% of posters who like DNA and thought I had made this clear.
Nothing will change if everyone just rolls over, though.
Incidentally, would you really hate it if the features that most of us would like were re-instated?
No offence intended. Have a (_)
Lady M -
Message 8
Posted by Ell Kaye (U2222944) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Go for it! Lady M!
-
Message 9
Posted by careen (U1935190) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
I wonder about including someting in it to make it clear that we are not saddos, as this is the way the presenter might well portray us. The ´óÏó´«Ã½ have made a commitment to ´óÏó´«Ã½i (do they still call it that) and therefore they should do it properly, and find out from the users what works and what doesnt work.
-
Message 10
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Creen, I thought I'd covered the 'what we want' bit. Don't know about the 'saddos' thing'
Ah - had a thought - back in a mo..... -
Message 11
Posted by careen (U1935190) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
I gave a talk about something (absolute nothing to do with TA) and I mentioned messageboards. Somebody said "Whats a messageboard" and I said "you know forums" Not one of the thirty people in there had any idea what I was talking about apart fron one who said "like a chat room".
Im saying this because its going to ba hard to get General public on our side when they dont know what it is or why we do it. -
Message 12
Posted by sheena (U1646662) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Hi Lady M.
Without commenting on the content, I think if you are intending this to be broadcast to an audience of non-messageboard users (as well as messageboard users) some of the "jargon" words and phrases might need to be changed in order for the message to be understood, eg
2nd para. I write from The Archers messageboard, ...
3rd para. We dislike the lack of "threading" (ie placing messages immediately after the one they reply to, rather than as now at the tail end of all the previous messages). ...
5th para. Other features that facilitated communication on the messageboard such as email notification of replies, reading posts chronologically rather than by subject, and text formatting options ....
7th para. "mods" -> moderators. "trolls and sockpuppets" -> malicious users of the messageboard ?
Hope that helps (and hope that is not teaching someone of your profession to suck eggs).
Sheena -
Message 13
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
How's this:?
TA is, or was, a unique community - in the real sense. Of the various boards, only two are directly Archers linked (Discuss TA and Notes and Queries). The Village Hall offers support to people with a huge variety of interests from Dogs and Shakespeare(I run these), ornithology, mental health, gardening - I could go on........The Bull supports conversation - impossible with the 'list' format - on anything and everything; silly and sensible and I have to admit to not understanding The Bull Upstairs which seems to be football orientated, as a result of the closure of another bbc board. The forums have been impoverished by the DNA format. Howerd 2 is still 'read only'. I suggest you visit in order to make a comparison. -
Message 14
Posted by Polly Tunnel (U1530077) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
LadyM, I would like to opt out please as I am not in agreement with the entirety of your message. Also I feel the use of "we" at the beginning of the third paragraph inappropriate.
Might I suggest that if you want feedback to take your complaints forward then a better tactic than sending a single post you encourage as many people as possible to follow your lead. I wouldn't suggest the different wording on each complaint though. Reading a number of identical e-mails would probably just turn the researcher off. -
Message 15
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
I did think about the use of 'jargon', but the closure of the writers' forum used similar terminology and was broadcast, so I figured it was Ok.
Anyway, Peta says that there are 'millions' of MB users.............. -
Message 16
Posted by Ell Kaye (U2222944) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
I gave a talk about something (absolute nothing to do with TA) and I mentioned messageboards. Somebody said "Whats a messageboard" and I said "you know forums" Not one of the thirty people in there had any idea what I was talking about apart fron one who said "like a chat room".
Im saying this because its going to ba hard to get General public on our side when they dont know what it is or why we do it. Â
I came back to Bedford from the Cambridge maxi meet, met my friends in the pub and said what a good day I had, and one of my friends said we were saddos, I said she did not know anything about us, but she had us written off, she is the saddo. -
Message 17
Posted by Lars Post (U2291030) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
I agree with what you say but how much clearer you could make the layout if you still had bold and italics to help you.
Go for it.
(Could you please clarify what trolls and sock puppets are?) -
Message 18
Posted by Rebecca Terrier (U2331526) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
< We dislike the lack of 'threading'. >
AS this is a personal letter to Feedback, 'I' might seem more accurate, or include a definition of 'we'. Many? Most?
You might also wish to consider again the relatively close juxtaposition of with witty asides re <'the bog roll'>. -
Message 19
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Polly, I have changed 'we' to 'most posters'.
If others wish to email, it's up to them, I think. -
Message 20
Posted by Rebecca Terrier (U2331526) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
< I have changed 'we' to 'most posters'.>
Is the same 'most posters' that you criticise the ´óÏó´«Ã½ for quoting? Bit of a bear trap, possibly. -
Message 21
Posted by Elaine (U531229) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:09:28 GMT, In reply to: Rebecca_Riots_ [
Go for it Lady M.....it can't do any harm.
OK, we're coping with the new boards - and they're better than nowt - but there are things that would make them better.....and you've nailed them
E. -
Message 22
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
No, Rebecca - I have quoted &age
-
Message 23
Posted by KT (U1158731) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Hi, Lady M,
I definitely don't want to cross swords as I have always enjoyed reading your postings in the past and have probably agreed with most of them.
But I don't accept the poll results. I, for one, didn't contribute to them because I stayed out of ML for a few days as I was peed off with the general atmosphere of negativity here.
I think it's perfectly valid to ask for changes, but dismissal of the new arrangements as complete carp (as many posters have expressed themselves) is counter-productive IMO.
I would have no objection to anything that some are asking for being reinstated, but I still think the new arrangements are not only sufficient but actually better if one does not expect the exact way things were beforehand .
Thanks for the skipful. Just what was needed! Ken Tun,
I know I'm not speaking on behalf of the 25% of posters who like DNA and thought I had made this clear.
Nothing will change if everyone just rolls over, though.
Incidentally, would you really hate it if the features that most of us would like were re-instated?
No offence intended. Have a (_)
Lady M Â -
Message 24
Posted by David K (U2221642) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
'willfully'!
-
Message 25
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Ken Tun,
The figures come from a thread in DTA and one in Old Mustard.
I appreciate that people who like the new format are less likey to respond, but can only use the information available to me. -
Message 26
Posted by Rebecca Terrier (U2331526) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
If you're quoting per centages them perhaps you should give the source of your statistics so that the robustness of your evidence base is clear?
I would be interested myself to know who was polled, when and how. Also what the 75 per cent means - is that the proportion of those affected, those who were polled etc etc ?
But that's just me being curious, you are writing as an individual to Feedback so, as others have said, go for it. -
Message 27
Posted by Sea Nymph (U1474682) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Does not participating in the poll give you any right to criticise or challenge the outcome?
I'm reminded of the TV ad that ran recently in which a man 'didn't do' politics, but everything he brought up as a topic of conversation turned out to be political and so his friend stopped him speaking. -
Message 28
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Ok - I have to work tomorrow so will hit 'send' at 11pm if no-one has any other comments.
-
Message 29
Posted by Rebecca Terrier (U2331526) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Sea Nymph, I take your point entirely about a person who has chosen not to participate in a process having little grounds to complain about the outcome. However, I still feel that the figure being blithely quoted here comes under the heading lies, damned lies and figures pulled out of thin air and emailed to Feedback.
-
Message 30
Posted by mike (U2254029) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
This is a good letter, Lady M and I support all you say. Although I generally agree with Sheena's point about the need to minimize jargon, I would still urge you to include the references to thread order versus list order as the point is crucial.
-
Message 31
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Rebecca - check the poll in DTA - it's where I have got my figure from.
I am *not* a liar and and, unlike those who state that *most* and *many* mb users prefer this or that, look for evidence before making statements. -
Message 32
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Mike - noted and I'll have another look.
-
Message 33
Posted by moo (U1419274) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Have u looked in the alternative mustardland?
-
Message 34
Posted by mike (U2254029) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Sea Nymph, I take your point entirely about a person who has chosen not to participate in a process having little grounds to complain about the outcome. However, I still feel that the figure being blithely quoted here comes under the heading lies, damned lies and figures pulled out of thin air and emailed to Feedback. Â
Rebecca, although I have no actual data to back this up, I would say that at least 75% of those who have expressed an opinion think the boards are not as good as previously and want the features mentioned to be reinstated. -
Message 35
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Mike - I have emphasised the need for 'threading' now.
-
Message 36
Posted by careen (U1935190) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Lady M - I dont think Rebecca meant that you are a liar. More that another lot of conflicinig statistics will be used back at you.
Ther was a thread earlier today about evaluation and what would be useful for us to have the opportunity to do this about the new boards. A form with ratings on all the changes that we could fill in and send to Keri.
That would be some evidence -
Message 37
Posted by Polly Tunnel (U1530077) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
SeaN, commenting on your general point rather than anything LadyM intends to incluse in her e-mail.
I think it is fairy nuff to answer your question "no" if the purpose for which the results of a poll are publicised at the outset. However, just canvasing views and then afterwards treating the results as an absolute truth and using the result to further your personal aims is a different matter. In the latter circumstance I would say it acceptable for non-voters to criticise both the process and the outcome.
I think I could explain my point better but it's time to fill my glass again and that takes priority.
Polly
-
Message 38
Posted by bunny (U2220728) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Lady M, I think the main issue is the loss of time order as opposed to loss of threading. But in general I think it all needs to be couched in terms that are comprehensible to people who don't use the boards so that they can understand why this might matter to anyone.
If anyone is interested I could post the letter I sent to Richard Smith, which could perhaps give someone or other ideas. -
Message 39
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
<>
careen, I realise that I am working with those voters who don't like the format (see my response to Ken Tun) but there is nothing else available @ the minute. I have been onto other R4 DNA boards to look at the reactions and they seem to echo ML's reaction.
I refer you to the quote from rebecca - looks to me like she's accusing me of being cavalier at best. -
Message 40
Posted by Old Spot Pig (U2233005) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Different people are missing different things.
I never used time order, and just couldn't see what it was for, so I am not missing it at all. I do, however, miss the email alerts greatly.
I am getting used to the lack of threading, and it doesn't worry me as much as it did initially.
I am not sure, now, whether I like the moving messages or not. It irritated me at first, but, like the lack of threading, I am getting used to it.
Spotty -
Message 41
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Pooter clock says 23:00
Clicking 'send'
I have tried to include all constructive comments. It's a very l-o-ng- mail! -
Message 42
Posted by Sea Nymph (U1474682) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Rebecca, not only have figures been gathered albeit in a fairly informal manner, but there seems to be a large amount of anecdotal evidence of peoples' dissatisfaction with the system across all the boards I've seen.
Try these threads
-
Message 43
Posted by Bex (U2258486) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:20:10 GMT, In reply to: Lady Mael Bethad [
Lady M, thank you for sending that email. I intend to compose something similar myself. perhaps if enough of us kick up a stink, they /might/ sit up and listen. Or is that wishful thinking?
PS Could you post the final version of your email? -
Message 44
Posted by Schez (U2212013) on Sunday, 30th October 2005
Thanks Lady M, I think your email might be helpful, though I'm too late for the 11 p.m. deadline.
One thing - when using the Radio 3 or 4 message boards once or twice recently, I could in fact tick an "email me" box - if they are new format boards, perhaps we will eventually get that back as well?
Btw, what does dna stand for in the message board sense? -
Message 45
Posted by Bex (U2258486) on Monday, 31st October 2005
Mon, 31 Oct 2005 00:05:05 GMT, In reply to: Scheherezade [
DNA = Douglas Noel (?) Adams: the DNA system was originally developed as part of the H2G2 (Hitchikers Guide to teh Galaxy) thingummy, which Douglas Adams started. -
Message 46
Posted by martine (U2324011) on Monday, 31st October 2005
Perfect lady M.
-
Message 47
Posted by Eilis (U1474217) on Monday, 31st October 2005
Mon, 31 Oct 2005 05:49:26 GMT, In reply to: Rebecca_Riots_ [
Sea Nymph, I take your point entirely about a person who has chosen not to participate in a process having little grounds to complain about the outcome. However, I still feel that the figure being blithely quoted here comes under the heading lies, damned lies and figures pulled out of thin air and emailed to Feedback. Â
Well said, Rebecca. I have taken no part in these "polls" because at no time was I told that the results were going to be used to back-up some rather spurious claims to the ´óÏó´«Ã½. Just because somebody took it upon themself to start a thread and call it a "poll" doesn't make it one. Perhaps the Electoral Reform Society should have been called in to make sure it was run properly.
As Careen says MB participation is still a minority sport and I don't think the vast majority of ´óÏó´«Ã½ listeners and viewers know or care about this or any other ´óÏó´«Ã½ board.
I'm taking a break from this place. To be honest I'm sick and tired of the half dozen or so posters who won't let this thing go, wind other posters up and play on all sorts of fears of what could or might happen under the present system. As I said before it can work, but not if people expend their energies huffing and puffing about its drawbacks and going back and forth to rival boards.
I tried to keep out of this because I was told I was being "patronising" to those who didn't like it here. Well, believe me, I've felt just as patronised and talked down to over the past two weeks. I've tried to stay out of it, deliberately keeping out of those interminable threads but even a discussion about Desert Island Discs descended into the usual. Enough.
Eilis -
Message 48
Posted by Low Flyer (U2221553) on Monday, 31st October 2005
Mon, 31 Oct 2005 06:20:19 GMT, In reply to: Lady Mael Bethad [
Lady M,
I agree with many of the positive comments that others have made, and certainly with the general tenor of your letter.
Feedback though, seems to have lost any teeth it once had. I don't hear it often, but when I do, criticism is almost always brushed off with some excuse or other ('we think you'll get to like it','we had no choice', etc.). It's not really 'our' ´óÏó´«Ã½ - the managers make the decisions and then they're cast in stone (the decisions I mean, not the managers).
mvg,
LF -
Message 49
Posted by careen (U1935190) on Monday, 31st October 2005
Replying to Eilis message 24
I agree that the discussions about the boards do get in the way of other discussions, but there is also the possibilty of making some changes.
And I dont think board discussions are going to go away - people need to ask questions to know how it works for a start. so even if we all stopped moaning we would stil ned to talk about them as well as asking for the things back that we like
The best way imho to make a distinction between normal threads and talking about the board would be to have a board for them on this messageboard, either a new one or upstairs which is quiet. -
Message 50
Posted by Lola (U633284) on Monday, 31st October 2005
We sounded OK to me yer ladyship
ie, We = the 75%
but ass you've changed it doesn't really matter now so PUBLISH and be damned!
About this Board
Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
This messageboard is now closed.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
´óÏó´«Ã½ iD
´óÏó´«Ã½ navigation
´óÏó´«Ã½ links
´óÏó´«Ã½ © 2014 The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.