Jump to content

if it means that much to you all


SteveD

Recommended Posts

if you would like steved to pay for your membership, post a reply (while you can) and i'll pm him by proxy, he's a very generous chap and am sure he will honour it ;) - always happy to help where i can.

quick question mr d, how much does facebook charge and that valued slightly higher than wscc (i think). the world has moved on much quicker than wscc have, anything on the internet is measured in footfall anybody who doesn't understand this will be a dying bread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quick question mr d, how much does facebook charge and that valued slightly higher than wscc (i think). the world has moved on much quicker than wscc have, anything on the internet is measured in footfall anybody who doesn't understand this will be a dying bread.

 

Don't you mean potential advertising, consumer profiling, and data mining revenues? That's what drives Facebook's (crazy) valuation... 

 

I'd hate to think what people would find if they profiled this place...  ???

 

Many online channels are struggling with their revenue models, what with people thinking that content is/should be free.  The FT made a bold move to charge for online access a while ago, as have a number of trade publications/journals that I receive, all are still around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an offer that anyone with self respect will not take up, even though Steve would mean what he has said. Everyone has had the chance to nominate the commitee and now they have reached a decision that some find wrong we have all this hassle. I can see all the reasons why but my subscription with PPC ends when I stop paying, to me this is no different. If that many object stand at the next election for the commitee and change it instead of the exchanges we have seen on here in the last few days.

If I was a prospective member on my 30 day trial, I would be thinking is this what I want to belong to?

 

We should move on and let the commitee make this work, if not they can rethink it. I used to be an AO and that was a pretty thankless task, the commitee must be feeling it even worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank God still got some savings....who nows how long they gonna last lol.......great offer Steve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff

 

The issue is not whether the WSCC committee has the right to change forum participation rules, of course they do. Nor is it about the cost. Nor the type of user, e.g. an ex-member, a potential member or Joe Public. It's about who benefits from the change.

 

Those who administer the forum may have a slightly lower administrative burden, committee members may think that the prospect of 'issues' affecting their workload may be lower, it is possible that the club may receive a small amount of additional membership income, but I can't see any benefits to members, quite the contrary, the pool of knowledge from which members receive advice on any subject is being consciously reduced.

 

Preventing non members from posting is not being introduced for the benefit of members, to suggest such is disingenuous. As a matter of principle I'm opposed to rules that benefit rule makers rather than the ruled, there are already far too many in our society

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand the frustrations of many, I was not unhappy with the way it was, but the commitee have made a decision which will go through. My point was simple, if the majority think it is wrong they can object and if nothing changes then they can elect a new commitee or some members to balance the opinions.

It is sad on this and the other very long thread, that many people who have put a lot into the club over the years are now left feeling less than happy. I am sure that this was never the intention but unless the commitee decide to reconsider (unlikely) we are where we are and arguing amongst ourselves makes us look bad.

 

As to who benefits, well one could argue that the "real members will" if numbers go up it is possible suppliers will offer discounts based on the volume of members, it may be that advertisers will see an increase a reason to place more adverts and enhance the club funds which allows more things to benefit the members. On the face of it the downside is being felt by some people whilst the upside is not seen at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FA, maybe all you say is correct.

 

However, why should you use the forum for free when members have paid. The logical conclusion is that some members will not renew and the club will lose money.

 

Take that to its extreme and there will be no money to run the forum so we all lose it.

 

Can I make a suggestion. If you're so upset about being asked to pay then why don't you pay? As a non member I don't think you're entitled to make the comments in post #20.

 

So, why won't you pay to join the club and continue to use the forum?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It is sad on this and the other very long thread, that many people who have put a lot into the club over the years are now left feeling less than happy

 

 

and perhaps where the confusion is with some folks - they may have posted on the boardroom - but that is not the club it is simply a.n. other aspect and service run by the club - without wishing to fan any more flames - posting on a boardroom altho infomative and useful is a very very small aspect of the overall function of the club :)  there is far more to the WSCC :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did try to point that out in the other thread but the forum police deleted anything not agreeing with the clique .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did try to point that out in the other thread but the forum police deleted anything not agreeing with the clique .

 

:no:  :bangshead:  No no no no no no and no!

 

Alladdin, YOU were one of several members who reported and complained about a post made by another member.  The moderation team agreed with the complaints and removed it, along with a number of other posts that followed it because they referenced the offending post and leaving them there would have made the thread look stupid.  Then i left a very polite and friendly message explaining why the posts were removed.  So now you're complaining about the moderation team doing what you wanted done, and saying it was a clique conspiracy?

 

Sometimes, you just can't win for losing...   :bangshead: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of my posts were anything but reasonable ? The post I complained about was abusive and contained foul language. Can you not differentiate when moderating ?

Bearing in mind the content of said post , what action was taken against the user, steveD ? Dare I guess ?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing whatsoever is stopping you from making your points again.  I already stated that leaving partial posts behind makes a thread look nonsensical.  As for what actions are taken, if any, against any member that breaks the rules, that is entirely between the moderation team and / or the committee and the member in question, and not for public debate, as I'm sure you'd want it to be private if you were the member in question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing whatsoever is stopping you from making your points again.  I already stated that leaving partial posts behind makes a thread look nonsensical.  As for what actions are taken, if any, against any member that breaks the rules, that is entirely between the moderation team and / or the committee and the member in question, and not for public debate, as I'm sure you'd want it to be private if you were the member in question.

 

As far as my memory serves me my posts contained no reference at all to the post that clearly needed removing,( other than a vague ref in a short one liner) ,  you have also left other posts in the thread that reply to my posts with quoted sections ? my user name removed from the quotes - how does that make any sense other than being in agreement with the "correct" side of the argument ?

if you would like to pm me a copy of the posts (of mine) that were removed i will make apologies if they do.

 

i will make no further comment on this matter, my posts were intended to be constructive as could have been seen by any reasonable person reading them.(had they been allowed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alladdin, just an observation and I do not want an argument. You have been a member for nearly 11 years and have 194 posts, about 18 per year. Hardly a very active user.

 

The committee work very hard to satisfy everyone. If you think this club is "cliquey" then you should visit other clubs forums.

 

I've had posts removed, I've never complained, maybe asked why and accepted the answer.

 

You're a member, if you think the committee aren't doing a good job, attend the AGM and stand yourself.

 

ED to add that you posted above mine whilst I was composing mine. (Takes us old farts a long time to get brain to engage)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please review our Terms of Use, Guidelines and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.