Somebody has to ask

[boxerman]

My last post on this subject as it achieves little as Rich has made it clear that this discussion is over and nothing will change. vushti is spot on with his comments and that is how 90% of successful forums run simply because it's the members that are the forum - their requirements change over the passage of time and if the forum doesn't accommodate those members wishes (within sensible reason) then members leave and there is no forum. Just like being at the pub, threads can wander and so long as basics such as politics and religion don't come into it everything is usually fine with the occasional whisper in someone's ear. Lose the members through lack of interest and a forum dies a slow and painful death.

I've gained a lot from this forum in the short time I've been here and I'd hate to see it die through lack of participation when it has such good potential - that's why I proposed the apology route from the three antagonists (something the mods should have been seeking to achieve) and two of the three were gracious enough to do it unconditionally but lack of input from the third killed the idea. Clearly some of those who are now posting on FB still visit but only to comment in this thread. I see a bleak future for this place without a level of compromise that is clearly impossible.

I hope the place survives but I predict 5 or 6 posts a month and virtually no visitors in due course.

[Dave and Verity]

From reading Rich's post it seems most of the posters want to get on and get back to normal, but it's the moderators who seem determined to kill it off. I'm afraid you can't have it all your own way guys and expect people to oblige you without question.

If anybody would like to pm me directions to the facebook forum, I'll come along. It takes a big man to admit when you've been wrong and apologise, I take my hats off to those that have done that, it's a shame not everyone has it in them.



Dave

[Rod Taylor]

Why so much fuss ??
Missed the "offending" posts as not constantly logged on and reading, and already removed so cannot comment on the cause just the effects.
Am I alone as treating the Forum as an interesting resource for woodland related information ?? The items on the Forum are like a book or newspaper that can be accessed for knowledge enlightenment and interest, and remain easy navigate.
Having spent my formative years on long distance trips at sea I have still not evolved the need to be constantly connected, so fail to understand why a Forum (book) needs constant posts to be considered useful or "alive". Shouldn't the criteria of success be based on the number of 'hits' attracted by the interest in the content rather than number of comments added ??

Surely there is room for the constantly used facebook system to run alongside the more "book" based Forum, and posts made to each as appropriate.

[Meadowcopse]

The personality and personal differences that have emerged don't interest me too much, but the technical differences between a structured forum and facebook do...

I'll admit to a slight preference for the forum over facebook (for the ability of content selection).
With just a quick look through the topic headings, areas of specific interest can quite easily be found.
The forum has no additional external commercial interest (apart from the mentioned 'good will' of http://www.woodlands.co.uk) and participants of the forum can choose the level of privacy and participation they desire in relation to their profile and activity.

The Facebook group is more visual and instant for the posts that are created, but groups in Facebook seem to have a poorer flow structure (a fault with Facebook rather than the people posting).
There are areas of Facebook with its shifting tides of privacy settings that I'm uncomfortable with, although being a closed group helps in this area.
Hopefully being a closed group limits how much a curious planning officer can look up in relation to someone's real name and their prior notification application and everything else going on in their woods.

Ultimately I think we have reached an unfortunate division in group discussion - critical mass means here or Facebook will become more 'successful' - although how we measure success in communication content, quality and quantity is a debate for another day...

The success of either is down to how we use it and interact and we all have the choice of saying something or ignoring something.

I'm going to stick around on both the Forum and Facebook, although they are quite different types of portal.
(This post cross posted on both).