The Choice is Yours  permalink

Come on, anna!!

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 48 of 48
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    At the risk of being off the topic of Radio 4, this seems like the only way I can get an answer to the question of TCIYs thread borders, and why The Archers' boards can get clearly delineated comments, but not these ones.

    I'm not asking for a lot. Not even action, just a clear statement by 'Jem' Stone, or some other programmer to say 'We could do for these boards what we did for The Archers but we're not going to'. Is that really too much?

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Preacher (U2899850) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Joe, you need to consider that there are a number of Archer-MB contributors who dislike the borders on the MB.

    Personally, I have no complaint about the current shaded/not-shaded alternation on this and other R4 MBs. Even if the shading were not abundantly apparent as is the case, the posts appear as separate blocks, clearly delineated by contributor name, topic title, and the "reply" links.

    So Anna: "festina lente", as the Romans said.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Preacher:
    Joe, you need to consider that there are a number of Archer-MB contributors who dislike the borders on the MB. 
    No, I don't, as I have not encountered any such views. Can you name names?

    I have, though, seen many complaints about the unrelenting whiteness of the revamped boards (how bad it is depends on one's browser/monitor), but even though I asked anna on those threads for an answer, she never obliged. I say again, I'm not asking for a change necessarily, just a straight answer. I think she has 'made haste slowly' enough for anyone's taste...

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by caissier (U14073060) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    I crank up to 150% so the text fills a lot more of the screen and the font is stronger. Make do when needs must, Joe smiley - erm ..... and put up with it as nothing is likely to be done?

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Perhaps so, but I'd just like to see anna, or anybody, say it...

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by caissier (U14073060) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Have you seen Waiting for Godot?

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    I may be living it...

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by yellowcat (U218155) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    The link below shows what this messageboard looks like on my computer:

    i811.photobucket.com...

    I am running Firefox with the Proteus Script.
    I am not limited to those colours, font or font size all of which can be changed using the script.

    The script and instructions on how to use it can be found here:

    studioj-scripts.apps...

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Joe K wrote:
    "At the risk of being off the topic of Radio 4, this seems like the only way I can get an answer to the question of TCIYs thread borders, and why The Archers' boards can get clearly delineated comments, but not these ones."

    Or maybe not, Joe!

    Let's face it, they only pay lip service to "consultation", like governments and local councils do. They obviously are happy with things as they are and have found something else to interfere with. If they wantd borders round it they would have them by now.

    Now try and get them to answer the question I posed a week ago about showing us an example of an "approved" thread about BBC R4 programmes which contained nothing about the content.

    It can't happen. But still the scythe cuts down the tall poppies. Perhaps moderation isn't outsourced to India after all, maybe it's in Col G's palace.






    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Yellowcat, yes I like that.

    I do also like the square format we have on here, and since somebody posted about having their text larger (150%) I've tried that and wonder if that's why we are squared up - to cater for people with visual impairment. Maybe somethng to do with the Disability Act...

    Although borders would help people with visual impairment too, perhaps.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by yellowcat (U218155) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    wonder if that's why we are squared up - to cater for people with visual impairment. Maybe somethng to do with the Disability Act... 

    I don't think it can be that - many people complained about how difficult the 'new improved' format was to read.
    Interestingly on the Ouch boards the BBC does give the option of changing font size and colour:

    www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/m...

    Presumably since they do not give that option on any other boards any visually impaired people are expected to stay on the 'disability boards' as they could clearly have no interest in anything else.

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by Hugh Mosby-Joaquin (U14258131) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    and since somebody posted about having their text larger (150%)  
    That might have been me; but since my cataract op, I want to make it all a little bit smaller again, but I cannot remember how I bigged it up in the first place!
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~smiley - smiley


    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by yellowcat (U218155) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    but I cannot remember how I bigged it up in the first place! 

    there are several add on's and scripts for firefox that could do this or you could have just used 'View' and 'zoom' in which case you could use 'View' - 'Zoom' - 'Reset'.

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Quick way to increase text size is

    Ctrl and + (plus) key together.

    Reduce again by Ctrl key and - (minus) key together.

    Repeat until it's how you want it. Keep Ctrl key pressed down and just repeat either the + plus key or the - minus key.


    There may be other ways too.

    I suppose you could get a wireless keyboard and sit on the other side of the room...!

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Yellowcat
    The link below shows what this messageboard looks like on my computer:

    i811.photobucket.com...  

    That looks a lot better, but I think you suggested using the script before, and my answer is the same. We shouldn't have to do it ourselves, even if we are that technically proficient, just because the Beeb can't be bothered to do it properly.

    It's a bit like the arguments about a government run library system versus volunteers. Individuals can never provide as comprehensive a service as a central agency, and in this case, why should we have to? The (paid) programmers don't even have to use this 'Proteus Script', they've proven they have the solution with the Mustardland borders.

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    And while we're at it, anna not having poked her nose round the door, curiously enough, here's another thing the programmers might want to look at, though it's been a problem for weeks now, although not a major one. When you start a post immediately after posting the last one, the three minute counter (flea) doesn't appear. First time it happens, one thinks yay, no flea, but if you press 'Post message' before three minutes are up, you learn that it's still there.

    Is this so difficult to rectify?

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by Hugh Mosby-Joaquin (U14258131) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Quick way to decrease text size is... 
    Works for me! I thought it was quite easy, but couldn't remember how.
    smiley - smiley
    Eversothanks!

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    I say, yellowcat, that colour change option on those Ouch! boards is a bit of fun.
    It is a bit peculiar that it doesn't apply to all the boards. As you say, they must want to restrict people with a disability to "their own" boards. Bit like segretation to me.

    So where's the joined-up thinking, BBC message board designers? Why not roll out the colour option for the rest of us, why keep the disabled corralled in this way when they could benefit from a wider perspective on the world? And why not give us the option to changing colours...? You would think that would be standard on all boards. Sigh.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Monday, 7th March 2011

    Good-oh, Hugh. I sometimes forget how to do that myself. It's something you usually have set to suit yourself and don't need to change.

    I'd forgotten about the View/Zoom option too.

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by yellowcat (U218155) on Tuesday, 8th March 2011

    The (paid) programmers don't even have to use this 'Proteus Script', they've proven they have the solution with the Mustardland borders. 

    I think that the BBC chose to ignore our comments about the design of the messageboards, they take the view that they have professional designers and we mere users should like what we are given and shut up.

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 20.

    Posted by Hugh Mosby-Joaquin (U14258131) on Tuesday, 8th March 2011

    I think that the BBC chose to ignore our comments about the design of the messageboards,......///...... and we mere users should like what we are given and shut up. 
    Not only of the message-boards, but also of BBC radio in its entirety.....

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    It must be very odd that a thread which cries out for anna's attention, in at least two very literal senses, still has to make do without her input?

    Does it have to become off topic to get her attention?

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    Well it's got mine. So then...

    Why does the UK, on the far side of the world from Japan, get asked to help Japan out? I want to know which countries are actually going to help Japan out. Perhaps a lovely Muslim country?

    The BBC only ever mentions this country.

    We apparently have people flying out from Manchester. Search and rescue people with expertise, according to Mr Hague and reported on the BBC News page.
    www.bbc.co.uk/news/u...

    Surely Japan - which is supposed to be well-prepared for earthquakes, has plenty of expert search and rescue people? Surely they have trained thousands of their own people. Yet I saw footage of people just sitting at their desks in a Japanese tv station stopping things falling on the floor. Shouldn't they have been under their desks? Is it all a con, this "we are prepared for earthquakes as we live on a major fault line"? So prepared they have built their nuclear power plants smack on it. D'oh.

    Yet again, our little country has to help the whole world out. Does anybdy ever - ever - help us out? Or are we expected to be smart enough to look after ourselves?

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by Preacher (U2899850) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    What a miserable, small-minded, mean-spirited, self-centred response to the Japanese calamity!

    One of my sons is a long-term resident of Tokyo. His wife has relatives in Sendai who, fortunately, are alive but homeless, like tens of thousands of their fellow citizens. At least they are alive, unlike to 600+ dead and possibly 10,000+ missing. My daughter in law says that the Japanese government is competent and has implemented their plan for these circumstance, but they are overwhelmed with the scale of the catastrophe. Hence, they have asked that countries with S&R expertise should send their teams. Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and the USA together with 41 other countries have sent teams, including 70 expert rescuers and 2 search dogs from the UK. Countries with photographic satellite technology have been asked to provide information to ensure the S&R squads are deployed in the most appropriate way. The Taiwanese government has donated $3.3 million which will be directed to relief operations by the International Red Cross and other agencies, and other countries are doing the same.

    I can only hope that you, leodis, are never in the position of needing help from anyone else.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 24.

    Posted by JermeriClart (U14480026) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    It is morally incumbent on every nation to rally round and help the Japanese in their hour of need.

    There is little hope for humanity if people don't do this, without prompting - and indeed they are.

    We are so fortunate in this country that we don't have natural disasters on this massive scale, but we could, one day , be in need of international help, and I would hope that we would receive it, just as we help others in desperate circumstances.

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by Hugh Mosby-Joaquin (U14258131) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    Surely Japan - which is supposed to be well-prepared for earthquakes, has plenty of expert search and rescue people? 
    It's a harsh posting that you write, Leodis, but there are questions raised within, not least the one above.
    I am impressed that Britain has Search & Rescue teams that are worthy of jetting around the world; it is gratifying to know we are good at something, and seemingly better at it than others. Why is this? I would also have assumed that Japan has such organisations, given the potential for earthquakes in that country. This in no way absolves Britain from offering aid and help in any form and a genuine gesture of empathy with the horrors that have befallen Japan.
    Which other countries, do we know, are sending aid? Maybe it's asking a lot of millionaire bankers world-wide, if they would like to pull the loose change from behind their sofa-cushions and send that to Japan.....with no strings attached.

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by madfor4 (U6248038) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    I want to know which countries are actually going to help Japan out. Perhaps a lovely Muslim country? 

    What possible connection Is there between the Japanese disaster and 'muslim states'?

    Will your next contribution feature 'undeserving students' and 'illegal immigrants'?

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 24.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    Aside from my post being intentionally provocative (as in the previous post to mine mentioning trying to get Anna's attention), it does seem you are particularly concerned because of your relatives.

    I'd be interested to know where you got all your information from though, seriously. I didn't notice Muslim countries in your list, though.. I have noticed in the past they do make a point of helping other Muslim countries - and publicising it too.

    But apart from that, why so sensitive? People who live in Japan know they are on fault lines and that they are at great risk of an earthquake, so that is what's going to happen there. Stand in a road and you'll get knocked down at some point. Maybe it's God's Will. He is doing a bit of smiting (selected areas only). After all, if we were living in Biblical times, that's what everybody would be saying, perhaps some are saying it now, as when the tsunabmi hit Banda Aceh, in Indonesia - saying it was because of loose morals. Of course, that was the Muslims who said that, as I recall.

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    madfor4
    "Will your next contribution feature 'undeserving students' and 'illegal immigrants'?"

    Depends if they are in the news for anything, really!

    See previous post about Muslim states. They delight in helping their own.

    I would be delighted to see they were going to help Japan. And they are much nearer than we are. Perhaps they 'll take in some of the displaced people?

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    Hugh

    Part of my querying this is that the BBC hasn't reported any other countries going except us. We only get part of the news. Aside from that, we get the same clips repeated every five minutes for most of the day instead of giving us some in-depth reporting.

    I've finally found - way down the report on the BBC News page:

    "Search and rescue workers from 45 countries are said to be ready to help. The UN had said the first to arrive in Japan would be from the US, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea."

    And yes, Fred the Shred could dip into his very deep pockets!





    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Saturday, 12th March 2011

    Even htough in my previous post I mentioned the UN's statement as found on the BBC news page, I can't find it on the UN website.

    http://www.un.org/en/

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 31.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Sunday, 13th March 2011

    Just heard some woman [editor? Producer?] from 'Comic Relief saying that the first one was a bit like 'Holly Hunter' running down that corridor with the tape on 'Broadcast News'. As I recall, it was Joan Cusack who did the sprint. Holly Hunter's character, *being* the producer, wouldn't be running anywhere. You'd think someone working in the media would recall such a detail from a seminal film...

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by Hugh Mosby-Joaquin (U14258131) on Sunday, 13th March 2011

    Part of my querying this is that the BBC hasn't reported any other countries going except us. 
    This is probably part of the same remit that means the BBC might state, " it is possible that British citizens are involved in the disaster". As if to suggest that other nationalities are largely superfluous.
    Also, I presume British Aid Agencies notify the Beeb that they're off to Japan. I doubt if it's the first priority for similar outfits in New Zealand.

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 33.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Sunday, 13th March 2011

    Well I don't know, if the BBC can now report on their website that 45 other countries are going (but only mention a few like Poland), why is this not mentioned on the 24-hr news channel? They have all day and night to put a list of countries going to help Japan on the bottom of the screen, but they only ever mention Britain.

    They will have got the information from the UN in a press release. I think from that they will have contact numbers for the British teams so they can film them at the airport. Pointlessly.

    I see Sky have sent Anna Botting over to Japan. Why? What is the point of sending over another mouth to feed, added to the tv crews who are there already?

    I can sort of see a reason for saying they have found British survivors, but I heard a phone interview yesterday with an Irish teacher - his contribution was largely pointless, he told us nothing very much other than the usual shocked reactions to the obvious disaster, but his accent was quite pronounced - I don' tknow what his Japanese pupils were learning - I hope it wasn't English, as it would have been with an Irish accent.

    So the tv crews can find this kind of interview - but when we want facts like what is being done they are sadly lacking.

    I saw a bit of CBS news overnight - much much more information - a much more intelligent programme, not like our dumbed-down dross which is repeated and repeated. Wake up to the 24 hrs news channel and elaborate for goodness' sake. Give us facts. I must have seen the power station explode 20 times in as many minutes. Young minds will think 20 power stations have gone up. I can understand repetition once an hour but it's just ridiculous.

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Thursday, 17th March 2011

    Been listening to Radio Gloucestershire all day. I tuned in for the story about the county council shortlist for their waste sdisposal strategy being reduced to two, both incinerators, but I stayed because... well, it isn't Radio 4. You'll probably know when I've tuned back, because I'll be complaining about something.

    In the meantime... Come on, anna!!

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Thursday, 17th March 2011

    This is the link for Radio Gloucestershire's page:

    www.bbc.co.uk/news/e...

    They don't have a message board, alas. Of the ones availalable below, anna, which do you think would be most appropriate? Or should someone create a brand new (unofficial'?) one?

    www.bbc.co.uk/messag...

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Friday, 18th March 2011

    Second day of listening to Radio Gloucestershire, and all is well. I had a small relapse yesterday evening, when I was in the car just after 6:30 and turned on the radio, which was still tuned in to R4. Have you tried Charlie Brooker's programme in that slot? It's really *very* good...

    I get out of Radio Gloucestershire what I got out of switching from national and international message boards to using my local boards more often, information that is relevant to me, and an opportunity to provide useful input. Also, the worst thing about switching to R4 ten or so years ago was losing touch with the music scene. Not that R Glo is exactly cutting edge, but it's easier to dip in and out of it, where I was afraid to turn off R4 in case something worthy/informative, like File on 4 highlighting police corruption, got missed. And I haven't heard Red Box's 'Lean On Me' in decades.

    I might end up going back to Radio 4, because I don't think I'm the typical local station listener, but it will only happen, most likely, if I see some sign that this station's producers aren't still so up themselves that they think what they have to contribute is worth repeating not once, but *twice* on occasion. Radio 4 is not what it was when John Hegley lured me over to it. It wouldn't bother me if it's budget was slashed further, to keep stations like R Glo going (there is a current threat to cut its mid-day schedule altogether, and replace it with 5 Live output instead).

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 37.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 38.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Wednesday, 23rd March 2011

    I can only assume that since I predicted the closure of the R4 message boards a day early, you are now investigating the possibility of a bit of 'insider trading'. I still expect the usual courtesy email, though, so that I can tell everyone *exactly* how prescient I was (it never occurred to me that I would have to keep my own record of a BBC posting, when you usually send the details to posters when you remove their posts). It hasn't arrived yet...

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 39.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Thursday, 24th March 2011

    Really, it takes an entire day to 'make a decision' about message 38? Come now...

    Report message40

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Friday, 25th March 2011

    I guess I really have no alternative but to register a 'feedback'.

    Do you think any heads will roll?

    Report message41

  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by U14576049 (U14576049) on Friday, 25th March 2011

    The Japan story is so big and complex and horrendous its pretty well impossible to make any comment without a caveat, and then so many caveats one doesn't know where to start.

    but let me try.

    How obscene is it to witness on the news two stories side by side of horrendous destruction and loss of life, Japan and Lybia, one caused by nature, and one caused by man.
    You might think Japan needs ALL the help the ENTIRE world could offer, I don't mean donations of money necessarily, but practical help. So any diversion using valuable equipment , boats, men not to mention jepordising market stability , with a military adventure seems to me absurd and obscene.

    Early on a team of British rescuers were shown in a Heathrow departure lounge ready to fly out to Japan, they were wearing flourescent orange overalls, belted up with gear etc.
    Who's kidding who? Its a 13 hour flight to Tokyo, are we to believe they were flying there kitted out like that? And anyway I can't even take a pair of scissors through security, let alone an axe! No its all PR!
    Why from UK, practically EVERY country is nearer to Japan than the UK!

    Now there is likely to be an even bigger tragedy as thousands if not millions of Japanese have to endure hostile weather without much protection or sanitation. For chrissake organised help is needed now.

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Friday, 25th March 2011

    I read somewhere, or maybe it was on a news channel, that in terms of scale it's only a very small part of Japan which has been destroyed. Most of Japan is acting as normal, people going to work, shopping etc.

    They do need to get many more people trained up in dealing with emergences, as these are the early days of a long period of seismic activity.

    Burma had a magnitude 7 earthquake yesterday - and the newspaper below says there were two large quakes - some photos too, when they eventually load up. Tectonic plates will be shuffling and settling for a long while yet, it's nowhere near over.

    www.bangkokpost.com/...

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by leodis (U1633262) on Friday, 25th March 2011

    Joe K, it is incredible how sometimes things just fall through the net of moderation. Somebody finishing shift will have just deleted it.

    Like the story of the postal sorting staff who have to get stuff done before they go home, so they sweep the unsorted itms into the nearest sack, regardless.

    I know we used to get mail at work which had been elsewhere - most notably Cornwall - then diverted somewhere else, then somewhere else, bouncing around the country - just so the mail sorter can get home on time.

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 38.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Saturday, 26th March 2011

    And 'as quickly as possible' now means more than three days...

    See, I could be wrong, and there's some other reason for the post being hidden, which I'm not aware of because I can't rembmer *every single thing* I wrote in the comment, but again, if there was a better reason than sour grapes on the management's part, they would have made their decision already and sent me the explanatory email, with text.

    That's not the only thing. Look at this thread:

    www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb...

    Message 126 was hidden, I'm guessing because I included a link to the 'Feedback' page I set up on proboards, and someone complained (reactive moderation), but again, it's been three days and no 'decision' has been made. However, when I saw it had been hidden, I 'backspaced' to my original reply box, and saw what I'd typed, then added a note pointing out that I'd posted the link beforw without incident, and pressed 'Post Message' again. That is now message 144, which *hasn't* been hidden, so why the delay in making a decision about a comment which no-one, following my note, is offended by?

    Other than the possibility that mods just don't like to admit their mistakes?

    And here's that link again, just re-illustrate the point:

    radiofeedback.proboa...

    Report message45

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by coolpolitealex (U14493116) on Saturday, 26th March 2011

    Hi Leodis, I think that there is an attempt by Microsoft and others, to educate the public about their computers and maybe take computer use and the users, into the next stage of the evolution of computers, because it is getting harder and harder for them to write ever more complex programmes, if the users are as illiterate about computers as they are, or also it may just be that we are older and not as so computer savvy as the young are .
    Either way ,it is just making us' or me at least, feel a lot left behind, in computers of today, users are far more sophisticated than us, i think.

    Report message46

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 38.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Monday, 28th March 2011

    Five to six days now, mods. How long does it take? I sent my complaint last night, but don't really expect a reply before these boards close. Be sure that I will be providing links to the blogs then, so if the intention was to silence dissent, I wouldn't bank on that...

    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 47.

    Posted by Joe K (U5367586) on Tuesday, 29th March 2011

    Nearly seven whole days now. 'As quickly as possible'? Hang your heads in shame, moderation team...

    Report message48

Back to top

About this Board

This was the BBC Radio 4 messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

The Radio 4 messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Other BBC Messageboards

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.