Online  permalink

Points of View Message Board Blog Post 5

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 651 - 700 of 1436
  • Message 651

    , in reply to message 650.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    niclaramartin, thanks for your compliments. The funny thing is I don't frequent the POV radio messageboard much myself (I prefer the 6Music MB). But it's the principle of the thing. Every little chip away at the messageboards is another step for the BBC to distance itself from accountability, to make itself more remote. The MB's are a community. And like a community there's a few odd sorts out there, one or two with questionable agendas, but on the whole ordinary decent people who want to contribute views (good or bad) about what the BBC is up to.

    And that's something the BBC should be fostering. Aren't they supposed to promote a sense of community, free speech, that sort of thing. Sure the message might not always be what they want to hear, but that's democracy. It's why we have Speaker's corner, why we have access to a local MP.

    And whatever Nick, Jem and his twittering buddies might think, blogs ain't democracy. They're just missives from above with comments.

    So I'll keep pumping away until I get some sort of coherent response as to Nick's plan of action, irrespective of whether 'northern_steve' or his ilk think we're hogging the MB's and blogs.

    Report message1

  • Message 652

    , in reply to message 613.

    Posted by Smilie Minogue (U8747614) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Very depressing reading Niclara smiley - sadface 

    Sorry Curmy, I meant to say last night that the document from the BBC Trust covers the issue of communication for the *whole* of the BBC, not just the POV boards.

    However, the exercise that's going on over *here*, does lead me to wonder if there are silent assasins at work over on non-POV messageboards or whether these messageboards are the first to be looked at.

    smiley - smiley

    Report message2

  • Message 653

    , in reply to message 650.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Changing the MB community to blogs is a neat way for the BBC to tick the 'community involvement' box without all the tiresome baggage that comes with allowing people to really speak their minds.

    I know the BBC have made a rod for their own backs and they are sinking in a sea of ever increasing MBs that all need constant monitoring and supervision. They are all openly visible and give the headache that the BBC is a very large corporation that could easily be sued for allowing the wrong comment to stay put. Blogs give them top down control of this problem and are proactive rather than reactive. It pays lip service to the idea of feedback but in a much more controlled way.

    So yes I understand the problem, as do we all I'm sure. But the way the Communities team is handling it is all wrong. They inspire an antagonistic reaction by their very attitude and their often glib responses. Again this may be a function of them either not being in the position to give us any real answers or by them not wanting to get tied up in 'you said, I said' debates. Again I understand the problem.

    So the solution? Well one possibility would be an open forum with people from the BBC who can make decisions and CAN enter into proper debate with the licence fee payer. That presumably requires some effort on behalf of those that are paying the hosts to hold us at bay and fob us off.

    The real question is, will they take that step or take the easy route of just shutting us all up and getting back to their comfort zones? Time will tell. But one thing is for certain, ignoring us, gagging us and insulting us isn’t going to do the trick. The internet is a big joined up place and if the BBC would rather inspire another scandal surrounding their current agenda for the feedback process, they’re going the right way about it in my opinion.

    Report message3

  • Message 654

    , in reply to message 653.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Geoff

    Nippie smiley - ok

    Mozo

    See I can write short comments. smiley - laugh smiley - winkeye

    Report message4

  • Message 655

    , in reply to message 654.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    "Oh, and the reason we keep discussing the merits of messageboards over blogs, is simply that, after our original input which included a lot of suggestions/ideas/advice to help improve the messageboards (which we believed this whole exercise was about), we have had very little in the way of crumbs thrown towards us to let us know if ANY of those ideas were of any use."

    It's certainly true that when I started all this way back in November I was hoping by now to have something concrete to tell you about technical improvements to the board. So my apologies for the fact that that hasn't happened.

    Your suggestions were helpful and we're hoping to do some of them. I don't want to say much more until we have it all nailed down and hopefully have something to show you.

  • Message 656

    , in reply to message 655.

    Posted by Angelicweeyin (U5849806) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:25 GMT, in reply to NickReynolds in message 655

    Thank you Nick. smiley - ok

    It was very nice of you to give us some sort of feedback on this. (jokey bit now, and not being referred to a blog)

    Report message6

  • Message 657

    , in reply to message 656.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Nick - I'm trying very hard to remain positive about your comments. Somewhat of a tall order in view of the actions of one of your colleagues on the 6Music boards. Also the fact that some very similar noises were made to us several months ago by that same colleague. Here's hoping you have more of a commitment to them than has proved the case there.

    Nice that you do at least stick around the thread and respond from time to time though, even though I think your answers could sometimes be a little less cryptic.

    Report message7

  • Message 658

    , in reply to message 655.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Nick

    smiley - ok

    The problem is that this exercise has taken sooooooo long, with little feedback (not blaming you entirely - the nature of the beast), BUT, we are kicking our heels waiting for the next instalment smiley - doh (not another blog smiley - doh please) <forlorn hope smiley&gtsmiley - winkeye

    The future of POV Messageboards IS important to regular posters, especially those who have lived through the decimation of them in the past. I'm NOT saying that some of them shouldn't have gone. There WERE too many. BUT, I think removing a General Radio messageboard would be a mistake (thank you Geoff for enlightening us), as Radio and Television are what BBC started with. It's a pity if when rushing to embrace new technologies, the central reason for BBC's existence(television/radio/viewers/listeners) are sidelined, or worse.

    Anyway, how's the quoting coming along. Not quite mastered it yet, have we? Surely you can find a spare ten minutes at 3o'clock in the morning, to master it. smiley - winkeye

    Lesson 2

    cut and paste comment to be quoted  

    But put both the "QUOTE" in lower case, (and VITAL, don't forget the "/" BEFORE the second "quote".

    Like this.....

    Quote from Nick..

    my apologies   smiley - winkeye

    Before we finish this exercise of POV Messageboard improvements, here's hoping you can quote from posters. smiley - ok

    Report message8

  • Message 659

    , in reply to message 658.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    smiley - laugh Niclara .

    Report message9

  • Message 660

    , in reply to message 659.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Nick,

    You say you can not give any feedback, yet in your twitters and comments to journos you have disclosed more. You also said in a blog on your home site (or work) that your mind had been changed... enigmatic or maybe just ambiguous. I asked you what you meant by that. You did not answer. Will you?

    PS. I support Niclarmartin's position too. A one sided discussion is either because one is talking too much or the other is not talking enough....

    Report message10

  • Message 661

    , in reply to message 660.

    Posted by Professor Techno (U3287342) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Report message11

  • Message 662

    , in reply to message 661.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    Think the prof's been beamed up

    Report message12

  • Message 663

    , in reply to message 662.

    Posted by Smilie Minogue (U8747614) on Tuesday, 10th February 2009

    smiley - laugh

    Now I bet that's the type of post that Nick and Jem would like from us! smiley - biggrin

    Actually, I must thank Nick for the more concise responses he's giving us lately - it seems to diffuse any potential 'flashpoints' (I think that's the word I'm looking for) - so thank you Nick. smiley - ale

    Report message13

  • Message 664

    , in reply to message 663.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    You are too kind. I'm learning all the time.

    I don't think I have revealed more to "journos" than I have on this board or on the blog. All the things I said to Jemima I had already said previously on the blog or here.

    It's true though that I had hoped to be able to tell you more by this point. Thanks for your patience.

  • Message 665

    , in reply to message 664.

    Posted by Helen May (U1633128) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    smiley - ok Nick

    H

    Report message15

  • Message 666

    , in reply to message 664.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    Nick, I presume by your last post, cherry picking which bit you replied to, that you are not going to answer my direct question.

    Report message16

  • Message 667

    , in reply to message 666.

    Posted by U13804688 (U13804688) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    officer cant you see its the methodology..answer a couple of vague questions..and ignore the difficult questions...a bit like those parasitical bank managers yesterday saying sorry..but not really taking responsibility..is it ok for the guy who is in charge here to say vaguely i dont have a time scale or basically know what im going to do......hands up if you believe that..and nick is your manager happy for you to say im working on a project..but i have no idea oof the time scales.or indeed ive no idea what im doing ???

    Report message17

  • Message 668

    , in reply to message 667.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    Nick might as well have not made any contributions to the MBs or forums.

    Report message18

  • Message 669

    , in reply to message 668.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    I do have an idea of what the time scales might be. But I don't want to make that public as they have changed, and may change again and I don't want to promise specific dates if they are not rock solid because that would just disappoint you.

  • Message 670

    , in reply to message 669.

    Posted by U13804688 (U13804688) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    not as disappointing as not being told the truth...you have posted regularly that you have no time scales..now you say you do..but your not telling what they are..??? as a ball park..do you intend to close boards before the summer..by the end of the year..or what ...if you tell us the truth we wont be disappointed..however your post suggests we should not trust a word you post..sorry nick ..

    Report message20

  • Message 671

    , in reply to message 669.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    Afternoon Nick smiley - ok

    I agree that getting answers instead of blog links is mellowing me a wee bit. Some times I have thought, "Oh what a numpty", and other times I have though "Oh bless".

    At the moment, I'm just happy to see you talking WITH us on the messageboards, even if you're not really telling us much smiley - doh

    I don't want to promise specific dates if they are not rock solid because that would just disappoint you. 

    You will NEVER disappoint us, if you eventually say, "Messageboards are the best things since sliced bread. I have decided to stop blogging and pitch a tent in the messageboarding area. I WILL NOT be closing ANY messageboards, and will in fact, be insisting that EVERY poster is allocated a messageboard for themselves to start as many threads as they like, without moderation, but with Search Facility, lots more smileys, Quote function (that's for your benefit, Nick), take away the 3 minute rule, and, well, anything you wonderful people in the messageboarding community want."smiley - winkeye smiley - laugh smiley - erm

    On the other hand, IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE CLOSING MESSAGEBOARDS, the longer you take, the better. smiley - ok

    Report message21

  • Message 672

    , in reply to message 671.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    Jem, on the other hand..........

    Report message22

  • Message 673

    , in reply to message 672.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    "you have posted regularly that you have no time scales..now you say you do..but your not telling what they are..??? as a ball park..do you intend to close boards before the summer..by the end of the year..or what ...if"


    At the time I said that I didn't have time scales. Now I do.

    I haven't decided to close any boards yet. If you read my last blog post I said we were hoping to make some changes in April when POV programme comes back. That's still a hope, but not definite.

    Have you read any of my blog posts? You might find the answers to some of your questions there.

  • Message 674

    , in reply to message 673.

    Posted by cricket-Angel Baratheon (U3382697) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    I haven't decided to close any boards yet. 

    Sounds ominous smiley - erm

    Have you read any of my blog posts? You might find the answers to some of your questions there. 

    (And we really could do with one of those, please.)

    Report message24

  • Message 675

    , in reply to message 674.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    " Yet " I don't like the sound of that word ? smiley - yikes

    Report message25

  • Message 676

    , in reply to message 675.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    ominous... it is like Chamberlain getting a letter in 1937 from Hitler.

    "I am thinking of going to France."

    Report message26

  • Message 677

    , in reply to message 676.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    Is Officer Dibble's comparison between Adolf Hitler and myself a breach of the house rules?

    What do others think?

  • Message 678

    , in reply to message 677.

    Posted by Professor Techno (U3287342) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    Nick i would say it is to be compared to a vile person such as Hitler is quite clearly OTT and extremly offensive.

    You have to draw the line somewhere

    Report message28

  • Message 679

    , in reply to message 677.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    No, I think it's just an example of how innocuous phrases can be construed to read something else.

    For example, if you were say 'I haven't decided to break into any houses yet' implies that you may well have considered it. It might not be what you meant, but it doesn't sound too good.

    Report message29

  • Message 680

    , in reply to message 678.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    In which case as the host I will remind Officer Dibble of the house rules and say that if he does it again I will remove the offending comment.

    I have hosted this thread with a very light touch so far and would like to continue to do so.

    But as you say you have to draw the line somewhere.

  • Message 681

    , in reply to message 680.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    OK, as you have assumed my analogy was a direct comparison (which it wasn't, just as we are nothing like Chamberlain) I will modify it.

    Nick's statement is like Delilah saying to Samson: "Y'know, long hair is quite becoming on some men"

    Report message31

  • Message 682

    , in reply to message 681.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    for the record, the key line:
    "I may consider going to France"

    The power is the comparison between the text of the letter and the subsequent actions of the letter writer.

    and the analogy is to compare Nick's statement with the use of the word "yet" juxtaposed with the statement that Nick had not decided to close the MBs.

    Report message32

  • Message 683

    , in reply to message 682.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    This forensic semantic analysis seems akin to a theological discussion. Its also a bit like the constant re-analysis of Nostradamus and the convoluted nature of his predictions, in the hope that we might find out if the end of the world might be next Wednesday week.

    The difference is that those are ancient texts written by dead people. Here we’re waiting for a straight answer to a straight question from a live person on the end of a broadband connection.

    Does that strike everyone else as making the BBC Communities team seem just the teeniest bit ludicrous?

    Report message33

  • Message 684

    , in reply to message 683.

    Posted by cricket-Angel Baratheon (U3382697) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    The difference is that those are ancient texts written by dead people. Here we’re waiting for a straight answer to a straight question from a live person on the end of a broadband connection.

    Does that strike everyone else as making the BBC Communities team seem just the teeniest bit ludicrous? 


    smiley - laugh

    Very true.

    Report message34

  • Message 685

    , in reply to message 684.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    Spot on Mozo smiley - laugh

    Report message35

  • Message 686

    , in reply to message 685.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    And I have given you a straight answer.

    I would not over interpret a word like "yet".

  • Message 687

    , in reply to message 686.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Wednesday, 11th February 2009

    In otherwords, and has been said before, the phrasing is couched in such a non-committal way that it could be read either way - but nobody could hold you to account on what you have said. We can rely on nothing.

    Report message37

  • Message 688

    , in reply to message 687.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    Since I haven't made a decision how can I be held accountable for it?

    You are misinterpreting the "yet" - as though the word "yet" implies I have some kind of secret plan to close POV boards.

    I don't i.e. I don't have a secret plan.

    "Yet" means what it says i.e. I haven't decided yet.

    What you can rely on is that when I have something contrete to tell you I will tell you.

  • Message 689

    , in reply to message 688.

    Posted by cricket-Angel Baratheon (U3382697) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    After over 600 prickly, huffy, annoyed, and even angry messages just on this thread, Nick, you'd think you'd know how we'd react to a word such as yet. We're already worried you're going to close our boards.

    Report message39

  • Message 690

    , in reply to message 689.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    Morning Nick smiley - ok


    We're not the only ones angry/upset about BBC's treatment of our boards.

    The following link is to a blog, about CBBC messageboard closures (scroll down to Jan. 8th and the following comments)

    newsround-bias.blogs...

    They even closed the "Bullying" messageboardsmiley - doh which the children found very useful.

    On the positive side the BBC has begun a new Ask Aaron message board. As the BBC puts it: there is a brand new Ask Aaron board for the time being. (my italics) This Ask Aaron board says it's 'the place to Ask Aaron about anything and everything that's happening in your life!' 

    BBC then closed Ask Aaron board on January 18th smiley - doh

    I'll leave you to read the comments from BBC's children visitors.

    Report message40

  • Message 691

    , in reply to message 690.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    That's very sad Niclara .

    Report message41

  • Message 692

    , in reply to message 689.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    Research by Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies

    "What do children want from the BBC?"

    cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/...


    In looking beyond the usual sorts of rhetorical claims made about ‘the iPod generation’, the development of user generated content – often hailed as citizen media – clearly warranted close attention for its potential to re-invigorate the BBC’s remit. The main opportunity was one of offering these audiences innovative ways to participate as citizens in deliberative dialogue and debate 


    and


    The NR (News Round) team struggle to remain relevant to teenagers as well as their target audience. Questions around interactivity produced a number of interesting findings, including the view that whilst NR is easy to contact with feedback, few felt inclined to do so for a range of reasons, with the exception of some of the teenagers, who actively used the message boards.  


    Back to our boards....

    Found this a wee bit interesting...

    lizziejackson.com/...

    Quote from Rowan in Nick's blog....

    “The community feel they are not listened to by the BBC and want a closer relationship and better feedback. As she put it, they feel like they are sometimes ‘talking in a corner’”. 

    Quote from Lizzie Jackson....

    This absolutely ties in with my thesis findings, that more listening to and acknowledging of audiences needs to happen in the participatory media hosted by the BBC. 

    Information about Lizzie Jackson....

    Lizzie Jackson launched and managed BBC's online community from 1997 to 2002, then moved on to Online security from 2003 to 2007, (including being a member of the Home Office Task Force) when she left to .........


    Lizzie is completing the first BBC-sponsored PhD, on the facilitation of participatory media content. She is currently a Research Fellow at the University of Westminster, School of Media, Arts and Design. 

    virtualworldsforum.c...


    Lizzie was nominated as 'One of the 100 innovators of the UK Internet Decade' by NOP World and e-consultancy.com in October, 2004. 


    So, someone with a solid background in BBC online communities, a former Member of the Home Office Task Force on Online Security AND one of top 100 innovators of the UK Internet Decade 2004, is AGREEING

    “The community feel they are not listened to by the BBC and want a closer relationship and better feedback. As she put it, they feel like they are sometimes ‘talking in a corner’”.

    This absolutely ties in with my thesis findings, that more listening to and acknowledging of audiences needs to happen in the participatory media hosted by the BBC  




    Report message42

  • Message 693

    , in reply to message 691.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    Curmy

    Some of these children are extremely articulate in their postings. BBC WERE providing a terrific service, where children could come to a reputable website and discuss topics of interest/concern/worry to them.

    Parents could rely on BBC to take care of their children, whilst they were discussing intimate/searching subjects, as well as the upbeat telly postings.

    As Jem says though, message board posters, (and presumably even child posters) could always go and post on Daily Mail's area, or some other external site. smiley - doh

    Report message43

  • Message 694

    , in reply to message 693.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    I forgot to highlight that the Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies Report Funders are.....

    Funder: BBC and AHRC 

    Report message44

  • Message 695

    , in reply to message 692.

    Posted by Lawrence Jones (U4805414) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    Message 692


    Quote from Lizzie Jackson.... 

    Thanks for this niclaramartin smiley - ok

    Goodness me, hasn’t Ms. Jackson completed her Ph.D yet? I would have thought that a media related doctorate would have been quite straight forward and easily obtainable within 3 years. Ms. J’s 2002 Roger Bolton R4 ‘Feedback’ interview (with Chris Kimber and Anna M. C.) is very useful debating fodder for message board duffle coat kids smiley - smiley smiley - smiley smiley - smiley smiley - smiley

    Report message45

  • Message 696

    , in reply to message 695.

    Posted by U13804688 (U13804688) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    nick i dont know whether #673 is an attempt to be funny...or are you honestly saying you started out on this "project" with no timescale..did your manager say take as long as you want...and now there is a timescale..but your not telling us what it is..do you not see how childish that is ??!!
    with regards to you being evasive and arrogant..sadly you work for an organisation which pioneered the idea that if someone is offended by something you say or do then you have been offensive..so if a large number of posters say you are being evasive and arrogant then you are !!!
    regarding asking if i had looked on your blogs d'oh..your short evasive posts on here are bad enogh why would i want to read a whole screed of your stuff in a setting that is not relevant to the future of these messageboards..
    and please tell me you were kidding on about threatening officer dibble regarding his hitler analogy..but hey the misuse of power and threatening posters is a feature of the management at this stage of the destruction of messageboards..

    Report message46

  • Message 697

    , in reply to message 695.

    Posted by Jem Stone (U517591) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    I've never said that BBC users "should" go to the Daily Mail to discuss the BBC's programmes, presenters and decisions. I've just made the point that thousands of licence fee payers do that. Also they discuss the BBC on other newspaper forums (national and local), all manner of independent or publisher run mboards/forums, and also publically have conversations about the BBC on blogs etc

    And that the BBC should take that into account in deciding what we do..

    Do you think we shouldn't ?




  • Message 698

    , in reply to message 697.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    Well kind of, Jem. The Daily Mail, amongst others, is well known for 'vetting' comments against articles that don't follow the party line (which as I think you'll agree is fairly anti licence fee). So I would suggest that what is read on many of those sites does not accurately represent the broad spectrum of public opinion about the BBC's output. Witness the almost obsessive way some of these outlets have latched onto anything that could remotely be considered 'offensive'.

    I would hope the BBC, as an impartial host, would appreciate that a messageboard platform that was open, free from commercial influences, unbiased and moderated correctly to remove only obscene/libellous material, would present a much more balanced approach to criticism, good or bad.

    Report message48

  • Message 699

    , in reply to message 697.

    Posted by Gizmomoo (U10999499) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    I've never said that BBC users "should" go to the Daily Mail to discuss the BBC's programmes, presenters and decisions. I've just made the point that thousands of licence fee payers do that. Also they discuss the BBC on other newspaper forums (national and local), all manner of independent or publisher run mboards/forums, and also publically have conversations about the BBC on blogs etc

    And that the BBC should take that into account in deciding what we do..

    Do you think we shouldn't ?
     


    The BBC should have a process for communication between viewer and corporation which works for both parties within the framework of the BBC. This should be based upon the needs of both parties, not based on what other businesses are doing.

    Report message49

  • Message 700

    , in reply to message 698.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Thursday, 12th February 2009

    "or are you honestly saying you started out on this "project" with no timescale.."

    When I started this conversation in November I certainly didn't have a clear plan or fully worked out time frame.

    While there has been progress on a plan I don't want to reveal it publicly until it is absolutely solid and hopefully we have something concrete to show you.

    I don't want to say "We will do X by Y" if I'm not completely confident that we will do it.

    " why would i want to read a whole screed of your stuff in a setting that is not relevant to the future of these messageboards.."

    Because you might find some of the answers that you are seeking and I wouldn't have to keep repeating myself again and again.

    "and please tell me you were kidding on about threatening officer dibble regarding his hitler analogy..but hey the misuse of power and threatening posters is a feature of the management at this stage of the destruction of messageboards.."

    I wasn't threatening him. I was doing what a host does i.e. reminding someone of the house rules.

Back to top

About this Board

The Points of View team invite you to discuss BBC Television programmes.

Add basic Smileys or extra Smileys to your posts.

Questions? Check the BBC FAQ for answers first!

Go to: BBC News Have your say to discuss topics in the news

Make a complaint? Go to the BBC complaints website.

BBC News: Off-topic for this board, so contact them directly with your feedback: Contact BBC News

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.


Mon-Sat: 0900-2300
Sun: 1000-2300

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Recent Discussions

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC 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.