People, everything is getting a little bit silly here, and for what its worth I would like to post some of my thoughts about the varieties of behavior we see within the Backroom.
People out and out lying is difficult to stomach. It?s certainly juvenile and without doubt pointless. I don?t understand why someone would do this, nor do I understand what satisfaction they would get from it. Nonetheless it?s happening. The only conclusion I can come to is that its like an attention starved child and the goal is to provoke a reaction, even a negative reaction, as if in some way this reaction and attention provides a feeling of self-worth. However, its pathetic rather than offensive.
There is clearly only one way to deal with this ? ignore it and fail to react. Irritating I know, but without doubt the stupid behavior would eventually stop since it would become pointless and worthless to the writer.
The other thing we see here is the seagull writer. Lacking in content and posted by bored school children, who drop in notes to appear witty and clever, but then disappear until the next ?shining wit? comes along. It?s a sense of humor most of us haven?t heard since school, but its only silly, not really troublesome. More laughable than anything else.
Again, the best method is to totally ignore it and whilst it will never go away, it becomes a very low-level activity.
Then we have the people we totally disagree with. I would take CW as an example. I doubt if I have managed to agree with anything he has said in the entire time he has posted here. But I do have to say that on rare occasion he is amusing, and slightly more often he is thought provoking. Those times he raises my interest I reply, when he doesn?t, I don?t. But you know, he is adding something, even if its something you don?t want to see. You can ignore some posts without judging the entire site. A qualification for participating is not whether someone else likes or agrees with you.
Although, CW if you have been abusing people off-line, that truly is pathetic. On the other hand, if you really have received the e-mails you say you have, that is equally pathetic.
Everything else is interesting, valuable and frequently educational. Even at the difficult times, the "good" stuff has continued even if it is slightly swamped by the other.
One of the things that has to be avoided is any level of ?clique-iness? or ownership. It is supposed to be a forum for a variety of subjects whatever the issue, provided in someway it has a motoring link, even if somewhat weak. It isn?t necessary to read everything and it isn?t necessary to find everything appealing or agreeable.
If we want it to be simply question and answer about technical motoring difficulties, then opinion has no place. However, if we want it to be an interactive and interesting discussion, opposing and conflicting opinions are needed, including stupid, baseless ones.
It is ridiculous that any one person or group of people can have so much effect without being malicious. And insofar as I have seen, we don?t have anyone malicious contributing.
All in all, its s good site. I contribute to it and I know stuff-all about cars, except mine always break and its never my fault and its always at the worst moment. Still, I know some other stuff which I hope is interesting.
I?ve learned here and enjoyed it. So lets all of us not get too anal about it and at least try to live and let live. We all have opinions about the most valuable and interesting contributors, and I know that I pay more attention to them ? people come, people go, but if we?re good, the Backroom will remain a constant.
You surely have to admit that CW?s Lada is good for a laugh if nothing else.
Certianly in the world of effort and gain, this place is till one of the most enjoyable I read.
I would be interested in Martyn?s and HJ?s thoughts.
Going back in my box,
Mark.
|
Well said Mark.Ignore them & they will get bored & go elsewhere eventually.I have a list (admittedly small) of contributors posts that I do not read.I mayt well miss the odd gem but I am prepared to sacrifice that.
|
|
|
Excellent posting from Mark in Brazil. I can go with what he says. But please let's not get into a long thread about this. Let's just get on with what The Backroom is about, as defined by Mark (Brazil) above.
HJ
|
|
|
mark,
I believe we have to keep things in there proper perspective and recognise everyone is an individual in this world and not condemn contributors unless they are abusive to others.
All the people who post on this site are generally well within this sphere and one should also remember that many who are generally interested in motoring are not all from the same social or financial background.
Age of contributors also come into the equation and as such are not perhaps going to evoke so much interest from the regulars.
The programme "Top Gear" seemed to aim at a sector who were deciding whether to buy a Ferrari or a Porsche and which extras to buy. Their ratings dropped and so was the programme. By the same token we need our CWs with his lada as we need yourself with your exotic motors.
OK Chris does wind a few of us up but that's life and at least he always gets a response and most of us would admit he gives us a few laughs and thats what his value is. there have been very few obnoxious posters to this site and we must be grateful for this and hope it continues.
regards
Alvin
|
|
For people that can't afford a proper skip.
|
|
lada's are not that bad, these are very easy to fix cars, plus because nobody wants to steal them, the insurance is very cheap.
|
|
|
|
I agree, the site appears to be dominated by a coterie of "contributors" more interested in scoring points or taking ego trips than really addressing serious motoring issues. Maybe Martyn needs to do some QC and publish some stats on the numbers of msgs actually fulfilling the original criteria the site was presumably set up for. It would be inteersting to see these matched against the "names" that keep reoccurring. Publicising these data would show up the timewasters. It seems to me most of these would do well to get a life; they must sit endlessly in front of this site looking for opportunities to make what they, rather than the rest of us, perceive as smart comments.
There are any number of chat programs where these people can indulge themselves. Maybe one of them might be enterprising enough to start a site where they could all massage each other's egos and their own and leave the rest of us to discuss more serious points more in keeping with the site's objectives.
|
|
|
I agree, the site appears to be dominated by a coterie of "contributors" more interested in scoring points or taking ego trips than really addressing serious motoring issues. Maybe Martyn needs to do some QC and publish some stats on the numbers of msgs actually fulfilling the original criteria the site was presumably set up for. It would be inteersting to see these matched against the "names" that keep reoccurring. Publicising these data would show up the timewasters. It seems to me most of these would do well to get a life; they must sit endlessly in front of this site looking for opportunities to make what they, rather than the rest of us, perceive as smart comments.
There are any number of chat programs where these people can indulge themselves. Maybe one of them might be enterprising enough to start a site where they could all massage each other's egos and their own and leave the rest of us to discuss more serious points more in keeping with the site's objectives.
|
|
|
I agree, the site appears to be dominated by a coterie of "contributors" more interested in scoring points or taking ego trips than really addressing serious motoring issues. Maybe Martyn needs to do some QC and publish some stats on the numbers of msgs actually fulfilling the original criteria the site was presumably set up for. It would be inteersting to see these matched against the "names" that keep reoccurring. Publicising these data would show up the timewasters. It seems to me most of these would do well to get a life; they must sit endlessly in front of this site looking for opportunities to make what they, rather than the rest of us, perceive as smart comments.
There are any number of chat programs where these people can indulge themselves. Maybe one of them might be enterprising enough to start a site where they could all massage each other's egos and their own and leave the rest of us to discuss more serious points more in keeping with the site's objectives.
|
|
|
I agree, the site appears to be dominated by a coterie of "contributors" more interested in scoring points or taking ego trips than really addressing serious motoring issues. Maybe Martyn needs to do some QC and publish some stats on the numbers of msgs actually fulfilling the original criteria the site was presumably set up for. It would be inteersting to see these matched against the "names" that keep reoccurring. Publicising these data would show up the timewasters. It seems to me most of these would do well to get a life; they must sit endlessly in front of this site looking for opportunities to make what they, rather than the rest of us, perceive as smart comments.
There are any number of chat programs where these people can indulge themselves. Maybe one of them might be enterprising enough to start a site where they could all massage each other's egos and their own and leave the rest of us to discuss more serious points more in keeping with the site's objectives.
|
|
|
I agree, the site appears to be dominated by a coterie of "contributors" more interested in scoring points or taking ego trips than really addressing serious motoring issues. Maybe Martyn needs to do some QC and publish some stats on the numbers of msgs actually fulfilling the original criteria the site was presumably set up for. It would be inteersting to see these matched against the "names" that keep reoccurring. Publicising these data would show up the timewasters. It seems to me most of these would do well to get a life; they must sit endlessly in front of this site looking for opportunities to make what they, rather than the rest of us, perceive as smart comments.
There are any number of chat programs where these people can indulge themselves. Maybe one of them might be enterprising enough to start a site where they could all massage each other's egos and their own and leave the rest of us to discuss more serious points more in keeping with the site's objectives.
|
|
|
I agree, the site appears to be dominated by a coterie of "contributors" more interested in scoring points or taking ego trips than really addressing serious motoring issues. Maybe Martyn needs to do some QC and publish some stats on the numbers of msgs actually fulfilling the original criteria the site was presumably set up for. It would be inteersting to see these matched against the "names" that keep reoccurring. Publicising these data would show up the timewasters. It seems to me most of these would do well to get a life; they must sit endlessly in front of this site looking for opportunities to make what they, rather than the rest of us, perceive as smart comments.
There are any number of chat programs where these people can indulge themselves. Maybe one of them might be enterprising enough to start a site where they could all massage each other's egos and their own and leave the rest of us to discuss more serious points more in keeping with the site's objectives.
|
|
|
|
Sorry about the multiple postings, before someone says I'm as bad as those I would vilify! My ISP connection is playing up this morning.
|
|
Don't worry, Growlette , I cleared up your extra posts for you.
|
|
|
|
You may have posted your message more than once, but:
"Publicising these data would show up the timewasters"
Displayes a delightful grasp of correct grammar that gives me a little frisson of excitement at the standards exhibited on this website.
|
Dear Vin:
Thank you for the compliment. I was going to say I was always top of the class in Latin (datum, neutral noun, plural data, of course) and English, but I now see that I have ended one of my sentences with the preposition "for".
Take 50 lines, Growlette.
No more on this topic, lest I fall guilty to the sin for which I have accused others, that of trivialising the site's purpose.
|
Mary,
Many thanks for the info.
Better half and daughter have approved last fling. Much depends on insurers; I have written to insurers of current "modern classic for a ballpark figure but they have yet to reply, perhaps suffering from shock! Another wanted something like the National Dept and yet another came away with something like the old "get a car and we'll quote you".
I thought we old-timers were supposed to be a good risk but perhaps only if we drive a geriatric car? Anyway, if we're all to be made very safe creeping round at 70 or even less, with Gatsos (now there was a nasty thing to do, by somebody who had had his motoring fun) everywhere where's the extra risk in a performance car?
Very little, I think. It's really an amenity charge.
Oh well.
Thanks again, I've printed out the string (don't seem to have facility for selected excerpts).
Best regards from Tomo (The Old Motoring Owl)
|
|
|
|
Dear Vin:
Thank you for the compliment. I was going to say I was always top of the class in Latin (datum, neutral noun, plural data, of course) and English, but I now see that I have ended one of my sentences with the preposition "for".
Take 50 lines, Growlette.
No more on this topic, lest I fall guilty to the sin for which I have accused others, that of trivialising the site's purpose.
|
|
|
|
At the risk of making this thread longer than necessary, I just wanted to say I too agree with most of Mark's sensible comments but wanted to make a few points in reply. Then I'll go away.
The issue of "witty and clever" remarks - humour is a very personal thing, and what one person might see as childish humour might genuinely amuse someone else. Besides, perhaps some people have been posting such comments in an attempt to lighten what has lately become a fairly humourless forum. Nor can I see why "serious motoring threads" should exclude banter, within limits.
Receiving, interpreting and responding to messages is a very delicate process. I seem to remember, for example (apologies to Mark for bringing this up) someone accusing him of being an arrogant show-off - well, I'd never got that mental image of him. And talking of interpreting things - am I being naive, or just missing something, when I say I've never felt the BR to be cliquey? What I do see is frequent contributors sometimes passing comments between themselves but not necessarily in a way which excludes others. Besides, surely each easy-going bonhomie marks the site as a pleasant "end of the bar" - and when we see one of those, we usually want to be part of it.
Anyway - call me old-fashioned, but I think all this results from the fact that dialogue via a computer screen misses out on a vital part of human interaction- face-to-face communcation which allows for tone of voice, body language and so on, all of which help to avoid misinterpretation/offence.
You could argue that this whole thread is achieving nothing but personally I think people are responding because they feel it's important enough to - and not because they just like seeing their name in print. And at the risk of being a seagull poster - that's my lot for now.
|
Good sense as usual Carole. Even those more aggressive posters should see you as essentially neutral.
I think the "coterie" argument point has some merit but must not be used to
|
Sorry, there's some very odd behaviour from sites/ISPs today....virus??
David
|
|
|
|
>I seem to remember, for example (apologies to Mark for bringing this up) someone accusing him of being an arrogant show-off - well, I'd never got that mental image of him.
Thank you. I think.
|
|
|
|
To be honest, Mark, you've not left much for me to say. I agree with just about all of your contribution.
There have been a few malicious posts, and some other reported behaviour that, if not malicious, was calculated to be disruptive -- recall the chap who claimed his pals were using his computer and sometimes his identity to make stupid contributions?
Things are moving ahead on my project to re-vamp the forum. Stephen and I have evaluated a number of other bulletin board programs. While I don't want to go into techie details, we need to have software which runs under the same environment as our server, and that restricts our choice. One that does comply is vBulletin, which was suggested by Ben Lacey a couple of days ago. So that is currently high on the list of alternatives. What I don't want to do is radically change the look and feel of The Back Room, because I think that familiarity is one of the things which helps to maintain the kind of comfort level Carole talks about in her post to this thread. But we do need to make the forum more easy to navigate, and Stephen and I are working on that aspect.
Which brings me to a question. I'd like to make the forum multi-topic. Lots of people have talked about how they look for the posts that interest them and disregard the rest. I think that splitting the forum into a small number of different areas would help to achieve this; so, for example, there could be an Admin area for messages like this one, and a Technical one for those seeking help with their car problems. Someone suggested an area for bikes (Bill Doodson it was, I think. And someone else said there wasn't a bikers' forum which could compare with this one). I've got some other ideas, but I want to keep the number of topics as small as possible, otherwise things become confusing. So I'm asking for people's thoughts and recommendations. Please don't post them to The Back Room, because I won't be able to keep an offline record of them. Instead, please drop me a note by clicking my name at the top of this message. And I'm going to apologise in advance because I won't have time to acknowledge your emails. Rest assured though that they'll all be considered.
Martyn
|
E-mail sent, so no clever corrections, PLEASE.
Perhaps we could have a section for such as those who do not want to replace the clutch on a Trabbie, but who quite seriously want to know whether a Mitsubishi GTO is better or worse than a last type Supra; and who are seriously upset at having their motoring wrecked by the anti-motoring cranks, their minions, and the mimsers? And who do not wish to be censored by the moderator if he receives complaints by (possibly vehicle using) anti-motorists?
Or at least, a guide to more welcoming sites
|
His Lordship can't help with the Mitsubishis and Supras I'm afraid.
But (in the words of HJ):
"If you want to rant and swear about the state of Britain (and I don't blame you if you do) then
network54.com/Forum/139837
is the place to do it. I'm sure Tony and his cronies visit the site regularly to learn the errors of their ways."
(from: www.honestjohn.co.uk/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=12984&t...4)
Although it might be closed in favour of:
network54.com/Hide/Forum/153896
If you want to find pro motorist links try:
www.itsyourduty.org.uk
and
network54.com/Hide/Forum/96157
No censorship, even (especially? - that's why they are there ! ; - ) of anti motorist notLabour plants and spin doctors!
But certainly no censorship of any remaining pro motorists who turn up and defend themselves!
|
|
|
|
PS
Exactly from where (from whom?) did Mark cut and paste that excellent post?;-)
Or was Mark that horrible Mr "B" Nasty all along?
Or is he a snake in grass, a wriggling, squirming snake, a Brazilian Python even, confusing us all.
In fact, is he, (are they?) Marko the South American Tribune???
One thing his Lordship is sure of: he/they are not Chris.
......................................Or are they??????????????????
|
There's one thing for sure. Martyn, HJ and all deserve congratulations for providing a site that so many will return to time and time again.
As well as those who outwardly support the format, even those that claim to be bored with the site.....fed up with moderation.....against the cosy nature of many posts.....not like technical threads and so on.
But return they do on an almost daily basis, and reading nearly every thread I suspect.
Tribute to the whole atmosphere I would say.
David
|
|
True, true. (No connection with Budweiser)
|
|
|
|
> Exactly from where (from whom?) did Mark cut and paste that
> excellent post?;-)
I'm smart, me. I know long wurds and can use them, sumtimes, in the rite order.
> Or was Mark that horrible Mr "B" Nasty all along?
Excuse me ? I write under my own name with a valid e-mail - always.
> One thing his Lordship is sure of: he/they are not Chris.
> ......................................Or are they??????????????????
No they are not. Not now, not ever, no way.
|
|
|
|
|
You're welcome.
|
Hey Carole,
Moved out of the area now so was interested to hear on the news the other day that John Lewis are altering some stores. Remember hearing a rumour that they were going to move Coles to a bigger site. Is that true and are they going to sort *that* car park?
Best Regards,
Stuart
Dangerously off topic but it is a lousy car park, source of several door pops grrr!
|
|
|
|
Hey up Stuart - so where are you now (besides thankfully safe)?
Don't know about Coles' car park (I have boycotted the place - my own personal protest) or even Coles - didn't hear that particular rumour as I don't read the Star if I can help it - but I'll find out if you really want to know.
As for carparking (dangerously off topic maybe, but hey, this is the Back Room and you started it) I spent a happy hour today as a quivering wreck beside a newly-qualified driver in his 18th birthday present and I made him practise parking. Perhaps I should have taken him into the afore-mentioned car park for some real experience? (Soon we are going to brave the motorway - good sense I know but I've had better ideas.)
Carole
|
|
|
Hi Carole,
Gone sarf, well not too far Worcestershire actually. Coming back to visit the outlaws this weekend, including a quick visit to Meadowhall. Then its off overseas again next week.
Re Coles, not too desperate to find out though it is still Madame's favourite shop. Mind you I have resisted letting her loose in Merry Hell yet.
So you are scared at the side of a new driver. Well all I can say is that in an indirect way you are getting just desserts for what I was put through years ago when an extremely personable young lady took me for a hack though Blidworth forest on the back of a nag. I had been through there in rally cars @ 100+ mph, and I have never had such a bt experience as on the back of that old soldier.
Got to go, all the best,
Stuart
|
|
|
