So have the saintsWeb banned

[Dr Who?]

Everyone that made the forum tick and have some life to it.... it seems very quiet in here!

[Lighthouse]

Could be. Or alternatively, perhaps they're planning a surprise attack at dawn. There will be racism, homophobia, porn, tubgirl, libel posts and plenty of repeated threads. Thar be a storm coming. Ye be warned!

[Baj]

SaintsWeb are confident in announcing that the MTL (Moron Threat Level) is currently Low

[Dr Who?]

Could be. Or alternatively, perhaps they're planning a surprise attack at dawn. There will be racism, homophobia, porn, tubgirl, libel posts and plenty of repeated threads. Thar be a storm coming. Ye be warned!

But you have to admit, it is all a bit tumbleweed in here at the moment! But that will be because we are doing alright at the moment and things seem settled at the club. People love a good old moan!!

[Dr Who?]

having said what I have said above I know you cannot have offensive behaviour on here as many people do use it and it would not be correct to allow it to slip out of control. It cannot be easy to strike up a balance.

[Essruu]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

[RedArmy]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

Completely agree.

[Dr Who?]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

Great idea, and think this should be able to action straight away?

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Baj, how long until we get the idiots back on? I actually miss them a little bit.

[egg]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

As a full fee paying member I agree. The rule is stupid and should be abandoned immediately imo.

[Dr Who?]

Great idea, and think this should be able to action straight away?

Oh but hold on 'Pardew Sacked'

[Hatch]

Its heading the same way as Marks and Spencers,

all the old customers/posters are dying (metaphorically speaking) and not being replaced by new young customers/posters.

[Gingeletiss]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads.

See now, this all depends on whether you agree in the spirit of fairness. Is it fair that someone who has paid a full stamp all his/her life, should get the same pension as someone who hasn't?....is it fair, that someone who can't/won't fork out a fiver towards the expence of running a site like this, should have the right to start threads?

IMO you should pay the fiver towards the running costs, but its all about opinions!

[Dr Who?]

See now, this all depends on whether you agree in the spirit of fairness. Is it fair that someone who has paid a full stamp all his/her life, should get the same pension as someone who hasn't?....is it fair, that someone who can't/won't fork out a fiver towards the expence of running a site like this, should have the right to start threads?

IMO you should pay the fiver towards the running costs, but its all about opinions!

How about if they start a post that is it for the day, and they have to wait for another 3 posts. I am thinking about this to much, as they still only get 3 posts for not being a full member so that is where they are not equal!!

[egg]

See now, this all depends on whether you agree in the spirit of fairness. Is it fair that someone who has paid a full stamp all his/her life, should get the same pension as someone who hasn't?....is it fair, that someone who can't/won't fork out a fiver towards the expence of running a site like this, should have the right to start threads?

IMO you should pay the fiver towards the running costs, but its all about opinions!

I see the point but the way I see it is that the restriction to 3 x posts for non members is enough of a distinction.

I cannot believe that full members would begrudge non members the ability to post new threads.

Perhaps a poll? If the majority approve make the change.

The board needs to change - Hatch's M & S comparison is spot on.

[Lets B Avenue]

See now, this all depends on whether you agree in the spirit of fairness. Is it fair that someone who has paid a full stamp all his/her life, should get the same pension as someone who hasn't?....is it fair, that someone who can't/won't fork out a fiver towards the expence of running a site like this, should have the right to start threads?

IMO you should pay the fiver towards the running costs, but its all about opinions!

For the derisory sum of 1.37p per day, I really struggle to work out why so many regular posters are bleating about this. The Cheats FC thread alone has provided enough VFM.

[Gingeletiss]

For the derisory sum of 1.37p per day, I really struggle to work out why so many regular posters are bleating about this. The Cheats FC thread alone has provided enough VFM.

As i said, it's all about opinions. Would you expect to be able to walk into a restaurant and have the same meal for free, as the person sat next to you, who has forked out fifty quid. The forum has running costs and I for one, am happy to contribute, I would if it were a tenner or twenty quid, so in my opinion, there has to be some distinction, between a 'full member', and a registered user. Others may disagree, but that is their right.

[Durleyfos]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

Good idea. Unfortunately, Boj doesn’t do good ideas.

[Lighthouse]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

Sh*te idea.

Attack at dawn!

[Dimond Geezer]

Great idea, and think this should be able to action straight away?

Absolutely not, don't implement it for a year or so. I've just coughed up specifically to start a thread.

[Durleyfos]

Who was banned over the weekend then?

[buctootim]

Absolutely not, don't implement it for a year or so. I've just coughed up specifically to start a thread.

I want to see this £5 thread

[thesaint sfc]

All the decent posters don't post on here anymore, especially myself.

[Kadeem Hardison]

I think that Baj and stevegrant are running the forum perfectly. They don't need to listen to all this silly advice from customers. Did Lord Sugar listen to advice with Amstrad? No. And now he is on telly every week. Baj, steve... don't listen to what these people want. What do they know?

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

Fair comment, however some of us have drifted because of the racism and homophobia. I just cannot be bothered to fight the the moronic element as it's me who gets 'the word in the ear' while trying to uphold a decent level of decorum. Now, despite some morons either tempering their behaviour or being banned, there is as you say nothing to draw me back.

So I just look in from time to time and comment on very few differing threads.

Would I rejoin if the racism etc reared up again?

I don't think so, for me TSW is now passed it's best. Sad for the guys that run it and put the effort in.

[Dimond Geezer]

I want to see this £5 thread

I'm surprised you missed it. It's a cracker, I'm sure in time it will be destined for the Golden Posts Section.

Brace yourself - here it comes:

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthrea...r-(not-virtual)

[Weston Super Saint]

As i said, it's all about opinions. Would you expect to be able to walk into a restaurant and have the same meal for free, as the person sat next to you, who has forked out fifty quid. The forum has running costs and I for one, am happy to contribute, I would if it were a tenner or twenty quid, so in my opinion, there has to be some distinction, between a 'full member', and a registered user. Others may disagree, but that is their right.

It used to run on a voluntary donation scheme to keep the running costs topped up. Those were the days when the site was really busy, and interesting too.

Having the voluntary donation turned into a compulsory donation pi ssed a lot of people off - even some of those that had voluntarily donated!

Personally I don't feel there was anything wrong with that system, and it shouldn't have been changed, unless the voluntary donations dried up. But, it was, and I guess to 'save face' there's no going back. Once you've made your bed I guess you have to lie in it.

[Thedelldays]

This place has died.. What has happened recently???

[saintscottofthenortham]

Baj dishing out 2 pointers when his mates are tickled.

[suewhistle]

Well, I got a two pointer for telling the truth about someone I haven't seen recently - no names, no pack drill - and I still stand by what I say although I could have said a lot more that would have been regarded as abusive, but all of it true!:-) Still, I didn't protest my yellow card...:-)

[AndyNorthernSaints]

Fair comment, however some of us have drifted because of the racism and homophobia. I just cannot be bothered to fight the the moronic element as it's me who gets 'the word in the ear' while trying to uphold a decent level of decorum. Now, despite some morons either tempering their behaviour or being banned, there is as you say nothing to draw me back.

So I just look in from time to time and comment on very few differing threads.

Would I rejoin if the racism etc reared up again?

I don't think so, for me TSW is now passed it's best. Sad for the guys that run it and put the effort in.

+ 1. You are not alone

[SNSUN]

Could be. Or alternatively, perhaps they're planning a surprise attack at dawn. There will be racism, homophobia, porn, tubgirl, libel posts and plenty of repeated threads. Thar be a storm coming. Ye be warned!

Good job we've got our own Lighthouse then. That's almost self-promotion...

[Denzil]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

This.

[trousers]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

This +1

I pay my fiver to post more than 3 times a day rather than the 'privilege' of starting a thread.

What's the harm in giving it a trial run for say a week and see what happens?

[RonManager]

This +1

I pay my fiver to post more than 3 times a day rather than the 'privilege' of starting a thread.

What's the harm in giving it a trial run for say a week and see what happens?

I agree - after all, starting a thread is just another post really.

[saintscottofthenortham]

Seeing as 90% of created threads are closed anyway... I see no harm in it.

[Smirking_Saint]

All the funny and interesting posters are banned, which is why i find this place tediously boring atm. So yes Baj, moron threat level low, but so is the interest mate.

Registered users starting new threads gets my vote.

You are not welcome on here unless you speak/contribute in a tone befitting an old peoples home.

[dubai_phil]

Let's face it gang.

It's BORING these days.

Yeah it's great things are picking up on the playing front, but the problem is that no new blood is bringing in new ideas.

Little news, little gossip which used to be the lifeblood and a general consensus. Needs shaking up a bit we've run out of things to argue about

Essru's idea makes sense, but maybe one new thread a day to start with

[Verbal]

Fair comment, however some of us have drifted because of the racism and homophobia. I just cannot be bothered to fight the the moronic element as it's me who gets 'the word in the ear' while trying to uphold a decent level of decorum. Now, despite some morons either tempering their behaviour or being banned, there is as you say nothing to draw me back.

So I just look in from time to time and comment on very few differing threads.

Would I rejoin if the racism etc reared up again?

I don't think so, for me TSW is now passed it's best. Sad for the guys that run it and put the effort in.

I know exactly where you're coming from Andy. I've decided to walk away (cue apathetic cheering), because the sheer pea-brained tedium of posters like dune, and the simple inevitability of racist garbage that results, as well as the pub-landlord 'wisdom' of DP, imparted while standing with both feet on the backs of South Asian contract workers, plus the utter boredom of the main board, all makes it simply not worth bothering with.

I used to post as Roman, and had enormous fun, especially during the tommac days - but the sense of togetherness in adversity, which has always seemed to be essence of being a Saints fan, has evaporated on here. Far too many of the acerbic entertainers have gone - and the sheer comic genius of some of the threads of a couple of years ago is a distant memory.

Never mind.

[Viking Warrior]

I think some off us had a ban by stealth. Im only allowed to post three times a day if Im lucky. seems someone on this site is not allowing people to renew their £5 to renew full membership.

I know I should not have been so critical of el toblerone

[benjii]

All the funny and interesting posters are banned, which is why i find this place tediously boring atm. So yes Baj, moron threat level low, but so is the interest mate.

Registered users starting new threads gets my vote.

You are not welcome on here unless you speak/contribute in a tone befitting an old peoples home.

Plus another.

I'm all for banning people who are clearly intent on doing nothing other than post contrary views for the sake of getting a rise (Scooby - laughably not banned for months). Banning people for funny or sarcastic posts is stupid though. That is a feature of the kaleidoscope of human discourse. FFS.

Another problem is the profligacy of pointless and sparsely populated sub-forums which discourage and hinder participation. There should be a Saints forum, an away forum, an overseas Saints forum and a general chat board. That's all.

Also, I agree that anyone should be able to start a thread.

[Smirking_Saint]

Plus another.

I'm all for banning people who are clearly intent on doing nothing other than post contrary views for the sake of getting a rise (Scooby - laughably not banned for months). Banning people for funny or sarcastic posts is stupid though. That is a feature of the kaleidoscope of human discourse. FFS.


Also, I agree that anyone should be able to start a thread.

I agree with the above, i don't really agree with the different forums though. Banning people for just sarcasm, having a difference of opinion or being a bit of a boy is utterly rediculous.

I feel it is the daily mail population, instead of using the ignore button they just moan about anything that they dislike slightly.

[Spudgun]

I miss deppo already

[trousers]

I used to post as Roman, and had enormous fun, especially during the tommac days

Happy days indeed. I can heave a sigh of relief now you've 'come out' as Roman...3 years I've kept that to myself... :-)

Be sure to come back for the next takeover.... ;-)

[Wurzel]

Like I've said before the singlemost and simplest way of breathing new life into this forum is by allowing Registered Users to start new threads. They can still be restricted to three posts in a 24hr period if the powers-that-be still think this works. There is very little to keep Registered Users coming here if all they can do is use one of their three posts on one of the boring and stupid threads started by Full Members. If all they see is the dross that is currently on offer to be talked about, then there's often little point ion bothering; If there's little point in bothering, then they will not be engaged in the forum, will not be tempted into paying up their £5 to use it more and will eventually drift away. I think many have already reached the 'drifted away' stage.

The powers that be might think they would be giving something away for free if they implement this, but if Registered Members are able to start threads about things THEY want to talk about, they'll be more likely to want to continue those discussions (rather than what they consider to currently be dross) and decide to pay the £5 to become a Full Member.

It seems to me like business and forum suicide to not allow Registered Users to start new threads.

What Ess said.

If I want to discuss Anthony Pulis* I have 2 options (well 3 if you include paying my fiver)
1) Wait for someone to start a thread about him.
2) Mention him on a thread about something totally different and hope to divert [I]that[I] thread off-topic.
As I can't be arsed to do either I (and sounds like I'm far from alone) simply don't bother.



*This was an eaxample, I have no wish to start a Pulis discussion

[Baj]

Some very good points on this thread, but of course the problem is we would then be giving away for free a "facility" that subscribed members have paid the privilege for. Its all well and good saying we should just do it, but how would you (if you were in our shoes) deal with the complaints of those subscribed members who feel we have cheapened their membership. Hardly fair on them is it?

[Joensuu]

Fair comment, however some of us have drifted because of the racism and homophobia. I just cannot be bothered to fight the the moronic element as it's me who gets 'the word in the ear' while trying to uphold a decent level of decorum. Now, despite some morons either tempering their behaviour or being banned, there is as you say nothing to draw me back.

So I just look in from time to time and comment on very few differing threads.

Would I rejoin if the racism etc reared up again?

I don't think so, for me TSW is now passed it's best. Sad for the guys that run it and put the effort in.

Absolutely. I agree with Essruu that all registered users should be able to start threads (not just full members). It's fairly obvious that payment has reduced both the quantity of threads and the overall quality of the forum.

However, I disagree that we should allow the less desirable posters and spammers back on the board. Frankly, they weren't 'funny' as they thought they were, they were just annoying, and caused arguments on every thread. Thankfully I think the forum is better being quiet than being filled with cr*p posts. Long may this new style of admin power last (despite having recieved a yellow card myself, rightly so I might add, although IMO 'scum' isn't exactly the most offensive of terms. However, I can't complain as it looks like the admins are being consistant: most of the offensive posters have been whittled out).

[Joensuu]

Some very good points on this thread, but of course the problem is we would then be giving away for free a "facility" that subscribed members have paid the privilege for. Its all well and good saying we should just do it, but how would you (if you were in our shoes) deal with the complaints of those subscribed members who feel we have cheapened their membership. Hardly fair on them is it?

How about offering Full Members some other benefit to compensate. IMO the most exciting times on this forum are when something big is happening. Why not help your server, by restricting the access to the entire site to Full Members only when the total number of people on the site exceeds (say) 500? That way, Full Members get a guaranteed service at the most exciting times, your server gets a breather, and the forum gets an injection of life the rest of the time...

[mehball]

It went down hill after the £5 rubbish.

[hypochondriac]

Some very good points on this thread, but of course the problem is we would then be giving away for free a "facility" that subscribed members have paid the privilege for. Its all well and good saying we should just do it, but how would you (if you were in our shoes) deal with the complaints of those subscribed members who feel we have cheapened their membership. Hardly fair on them is it?

Well firstly I pay for the right to post more than three times and I really want to let everyone be able to start threads. As someone mentioned maybe give it a trial run. Remember classic threads like mark loves Amy and the ginger guy thread? Would they have been started by people who had paid? Unlikely. I say try it and see what happens.