Log In
Register
11.08pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline
@meanmistermustard , I wasn’t saying that there were “plans to close or remove the ATN forum“, I was making a suggestion that it should be done. I can see the need for ‘controls’, I was suggesting that I am finding them increasingly arbitrary and removing the forum would largely remove the arbitrary nature of the changes (and remove many of Joe’s headaches over this part of the forum).
I understand that this is a Beatles site, but if you allow off-topic discussion then those discussions should not be at the whim of some people finding them interesting.
==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
11.22pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline @trcanberra, I was replying to your suggestion that it should be done as thru all the discussions we have had it did get it mentioned but was quickly decided not to be done by all. There is far more to topics being closed than just if a mod or Joe finds them interesting; if that was the case a hell of a lot more would be gone.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
11.48pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
I’m afraid I tend to largely agree with @trcanberra. I am left wondering what is the next “social” thread to be locked or redefined.
First we lost the heal/hurt games, but that was okay because we were left with the rest, while some of the social threads were locked.
I really do understand the need to keep some control of the forum, and to remember that it’s a Beatles forum. However, I am firmly of the view that the social aspect of this forum is what keeps it so vibrant and active. And, tbh, I see little point in discussing these things with @Joe and the mods after the event, as I don’t believe that would see anything change.
There could have be a discussion with the forum members before the move on the games was made.
Joe could have suggested, for instance, that he was going to make major changes to the games, and that there would be a cull (and I think making all the games Beatles-related is effectively a cull that will largely see them die a death), but that he was open to opinion. I would have suggested that people choose six games to become Beatles-related only games, six games to remain open (in subject) games, and six to lock. And that new games would need Joe/mod approval before they started.
It could then have been tallied the games people most like as open games, those they were happy to see become totally Beatles-themed, and those we’d happily say goodbye to.
I think this could have been done in a far better way. Just an opinion though.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
Starr Shine?, trcanberra, Beatlebug, Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<, Mr. Kite"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
11.58pm
1 November 2013
Offline 
Von Nasty said
There could have be a discussion with the forum members before the move on the games was made.
I feel that any major forum change should be discussed on the forum before they happen. The mods and Joe don’t have to follow majority opinion but I feel that having a on forum discussion before big forum situations will make things a lot easier for people to handle
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:
trcanberra, Ron Nasty, Matt Busby
12.45am
8 November 2012
Offline 
I suppose I’m in the minority, as I don’t think Joe owes us those conversations beforehand. It might be preferable to some members, but, really, it’s his board.
I tend to think of members of a forum – any forum, not just this one – more like renters in a building and an admin is the landlord. I realize that sounds impersonal and doesn’t speak to our emotional attachment to the board. And I would think differently if the board had been the brainchild of a group of people banding together. But that wasn’t the case, and ultimately, it’s Joe’s vision that’s takes precedence.
parlance
The following people thank parlance for this post:
meanmistermustard, Joe, Zig1.03am
8 February 2014
Offline I’m not going to choose sides on this issue – as Rick replied to Mjr. Strausser’s query “You have no sympathy for the fox?” in Casablanca: “Not particularly – I understand the point of view of the hound too.”
But I would like to make a case against boycotting the Games section altogether. Some games are very educational. When I came to the computer just now, I was going to try to revive a game that had petered out…the Song Lyric game. It helps me find lyrics I don’t know cold (there still are some *blush*). I’m sure the trivia games are also educational, but I haven’t ventured into them yet (soon! i love trivia!).
The following people thank Matt Busby for this post:
parlance, Beatlebug, Mr. Kite1.33am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline I would agree, @parlance, however shortly before making the changes to the games that he’s made, @Joe commented in a thread I created – sparked by the wonderful April Fool’s Day prank – that he considered the forum to be “everyone’s”.
My own opinion is that, if he does believe it belongs to everyone, more consideration of everyone’s feelings on things like this, rather than just the discussion between the few people who police the forum, is an idea.
Joe himself acknowledged that was something of a double standard. I don’t like double standards.
And just because he sought a wider range of opinions, there’s nothing to say he has to accept. He just might get a better feeling for what the reaction and feeling might be.
I really want to see the forum go from strength to strength. It is something I am proud to be a part of, and thankful Joe that created it. I just worry that parts of what makes it what it has been while I’ve been here and known it are being chipped away.
There are other forums out there that talk Beatles, but this has something about it those don’t. I worry you lose something of that difference that has many of us on here daily.
I fear, no insult intended @Starr Shine?, that we’ll all end up on her back-up because she decides to keep those elements of the forum going that Joe’s closing or limiting.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
Beatlebug, trcanberra, Mr. Kite"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
1.41am
1 November 2013
Offline Please don’t leave this forum for the back up. It is not intended for people to take permanent residents. I think that people will be able to work things out on the fab forum one way or another. I recommend some communication on the forum before changes. Even if the mods and Joe don’t go with that I plan on sticking around for years to come
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:
parlance, trcanberra1.50am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline Just because you don’t the work, @Starr Shine?!
No, I’m not planning on migrating to your site any time soon! I like it here too much (despite what it may sound like)!
I’m merely suggesting that sometimes you break something without realising, and by then it’s too late.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
trcanberra"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
1.51am
8 November 2012
Offline Ron Nasty said
I would agree, parlance, however shortly before making the changes to the games that he’s made, @Joe commented in a thread I created – sparked by the wonderful April Fool’s Day prank – that he considered the forum to be “everyone’s”.
And I think it is everyone’s metaphorically speaking in that we use it and contribute to it and help shape what it is. But it’s still Joe’s vision and baby. I didn’t interpret that statement as one of ownership.
parlance
The following people thank parlance for this post:
Beatlebug, Joe2.06am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline @parlance said
And I think it is everyone’s metaphorically speaking in that we use it and contribute to it and help shape what it is.parlance
We use it, and contribute to it, but I’m afraid I feel today was an example of our not being allowed to help shape what it is.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
trcanberra"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
2.15am
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline I mentioned in another thread that I joined this forum because of the Beatles but stayed because of the off-topic discussions with fellow Beatles fans.
Limiting the off-topic discussions will limit my interest in the site. I fail to see how people using the off-topic threads in all sorts of wild and wonderful ways diminishes the rest of the site in any way, and it is pretty clear what most threads are about and people are welcome to stay out of the ones they find banal or boring. However, I also recognise the forums are subject to the desires of the owners of the real estate – I’m just a squatter here.
Anwyay, I’ve probably said enough on this now and will sit on the sidelines and see how the forums shape up after all of the changes have been made.
Peace and Love!!
The following people thank trcanberra for this post:
Beatlebug, Mr. Kite==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
8.27am
27 March 2015
Offline
I hope it’s okay for a n00b to chime in. If not, carry on 
For me, games and off-topic chat are a good way to get acquainted and not feel like an outsider as much. Sure, I love the Beatles and I can’t shut up about them. But everyone here knows so much more about them than I do, which makes many of the Beatles discussions intimidating. I’m dipping my toes into that water, but it’ll be a long time before I’m swimming, you know? Being a very insecure person, the random stuff makes it easier for me to come a part of the forum. So yes, seeing the off-topic games go will make blending in more difficult for me.
Having said that, I have been a forum owner for a decade and I know how difficult it is to keep things tidy, especially when some members feel like they own the place and will do whatever it is they want, even if it goes against the forum rules. So I’m not going to criticise the mods, I just wanted to share my sentiments as a new member 
The following people thank Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^< for this post:
trcanberra, Beatlebug, parlanceFormerly Known As JPM-Fangirl --
2016
'Out There' - 07-06-2015 - Ziggo Dome Amsterdam -- 'One On One' - 12-06-2016 - Pinkpop Festival Landgraaf
8.53am
Moderators
Members
Reviewers
20 August 2013
Offline @Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<, yes, it is perfectly fine for you and any other members, new or not, to let us know your thoughts on the matter. Thank you, sincerely, for feeling comfortable enough to tell us. 
& 
The following people thank Ahhh Girl for this post:
Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<, trcanberra, Starr Shine?, parlanceCan buy Joe love! Amazon | iTunes
Check here for "how do I do this" guide to the forum. 
(2017) 
(2018)
11.43am
31 March 2008
Offline
OK. There’s a lot here to go through. I’ll do the best I can.
This forum is everyone’s. Anyone can sign up, anyone can post. But there is moderation, there are forum rules, there is a structure, and I think we all generally recognise the need for that (even if the execution isn’t always to everyone’s liking). The admins and moderators are here to ensure that things work smoothly. We discuss how to shape the forum to make it better in the longer term, even if that involves a little bit of short-term discomfort.
In my day job I’ve been involved in some major site redesigns, and I know how loyal users can hate change. Decisions aren’t taken lightly. But I do also know that if they’re done with enough consideration beforehand, after a short period of readjustment people generally accept what’s changed. Facebook’s a great example: people hate major changes to FB, but within a couple of weeks it’s normally forgotten about. Leaving out who FB is for (whether for Zuckerberg, advertisers or users), it’s not a democracy. It allows people a blank slate to interact with, but the company doesn’t hold polls on whether to enact a change. They do A/B user testing, consult their engineers and designers, and set about making changes they see as good for the business. The sandbox has very defined boundaries.
I’m on a far smaller scale, but there are still parallels. As I mentioned elsewhere, I provide the framework (the forum structure and some rules), and the rest is up to the users. The mods and I reserve the right to move people’s posts around if they’re better off in another thread or section. Sometimes we make bigger changes after a lot of consideration (and often disagreement). I trust the mods – I work with them because they’re good to sound off, have sensible opinions and don’t get too clouded by emotion.
If I opened up big decisions to the forum I’d never get anywhere. I’d get a range of contrasting opinions, some of which I’d inevitably disagree with, and I’d be left with uncertainty and inaction. I do ask people’s opinions often, but sometimes I need to go with gut instinct and a longer term vision of what I want. I’ve been running online communities for over 15 years and am normally a reasonable judge of what works, but we’re all human and sometimes I get things wrong. But I don’t rush into anything. Normally if I’m considering making a change it’ll have been gnawing away at me for a while until a good fit presents itself. We’ve been discussing what to do with forum games since January. After weighing up various pros and cons we decided to make them Beatles-only.
I’m sorry if people are upset that the Baker’s Dozen won’t allow the top 13 Led Zeppelin songs, children’s cartoons or French cheeses, but we’ll all just have to live with that. There were actually only a handful of games where I had to ask them to be Beatles-only from now on. The vast majority already were. I only locked a couple of threads (some already had been in previous spring cleans). I’m not suddenly pulling the rug, just shifting it a little.
I’m not going to close All Together Now . It’s helped a lot of people get to know one another, and I’m glad of that. Sometimes, though, it gets too self-indulgent. Some people get carried away with certain themes to the detriment of the forum as a whole. Believe it or not, I have some non-Beatles obsessions too. I could go on and on about them but I try to remember why we’re all here. I don’t mind people discussing their abiding love of Led Zeppelin, children’s cartoons and French cheeses, but day after day it’d get a bit tedious and they’d be better off going to more appropriate places. There are threads here for random thoughts, what’s going on in your lives, what you’re listening to – hell, even what you’re eating right now. I don’t think anybody needs their own personal thread for their own lives, likes, loves and loathes. Start a blog or get a Facebook account instead, or use one of the existing threads.
Sheesh. Nobody’s died (apart from Cynthia, RIP). Nobody’s saying you can’t have off-topic chat. But when the scales tip so that the Beatles side is too high up, I have to take some of the weight off the other side. That’s my job here.
The following people thank Joe for this post:
meanmistermustard, Zig, parlanceCan buy me love! Please consider supporting the Beatles Bible on Amazon
Or buy my paperback/ebook! Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs
Don't miss The Bowie Bible – now live!
4.29pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline First, I want to thank everyone on here for sharing their opinions on the latest tweaks. In 12 days, I will be commemorating my 5th year on this Forum (if you are gift shopping, I’m a large). During my time here, the passion of our members has never ceased to amaze and please me. I share your love of the Beatles and I also share your love of the social aspects of this Forum. What I do not share is your concerns over the loss of the latter. We are not going anywhere. Would you like to let us know what is happening in your life good bad or otherwise? Post it in the “What’s Happening…” thread. Want to wish a member a happy birthday? We have a thread for that. Have you bought a new album or heard of a new band we all might like. Yup – got places for that too. Did you just have a wild wacky thought that you all think we’d get a laugh out of or want to know if anyone else ever thought the same thing? I do all the time. You are reading a post written by the King of Wild Wacky Thoughts. I just wish there was a place to post them. Wait ! There is the “Derail…” thread. In case you haven’t looked at the first post of that thread, your King of Wild Wacky Thoughts created that thread because in his Forum infancy, he necessitated many “stay on topic” requests from Joe and others. You’re welcome.
But enough about me. Let’s talk about you. What are you losing? With all of the threads I mentioned above and many, many more, do we really need a non-Beatles themed game to learn about and appreciate each other? Is our decision to move the games section to its own section going to cause you to lose sleep? If it does, discuss it in the derail thread – chances are trcanberra is awake and ready to chat with you – *wave*. Honestly, this is going to be OK.
Lastly, let’s have a few words about the decision to make the recent tweaks (that’s all they are, folks). We (Joe, AhhhGirl, meanmistermustard and I) did not talk about this over a few days. We did not talk about this over a few weeks. We talked, deliberated, debated and agonized over this for many many many months. We kept hoping that a lot of the reasons why we were having these discussions in the first place would go away on their own. Some did, some did not, some got even further out of hand. As for the lack of soliciting input from Forum members, consider this. What if we did? What if we asked 20 of you what you thought? If 10 of you wanted to go in one direction and 10 of you in the other, or any numerical division for that matter; it would have created another headache in trying to appease those of you who did not get their way. Would you want that on your head? If not, shame on you for putting that on our four heads. There is an expression here in the US in regard to managers and coaches of professional sports teams. It goes like this; “If you keep acting on the wants and needs of the fans, you will end up sitting in the bleachers among them”. Meaning, you won’t have a job for very long because you will lose the vision of success you had for your operation.
We almost lost this entire site. We did not lose a social aspect. Joe and the Mods have no intention of looking for the next social aspect to be blown up. We mildly tweaked the Forum and you lost virtually nothing. Sleep well tonight. See ya ‘round the Forum.
Peace and Love,
Zig
The following people thank Zig for this post:
parlance, meanmistermustard, Beatlebug, JoeTo the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
5.18pm
1 November 2013
Offline Zig said
Lastly, let’s have a few words about the decision to make the recent tweaks (that’s all they are, folks). We (Joe, AhhhGirl, meanmistermustard and I) did not talk about this over a few days. We did not talk about this over a few weeks. We talked, deliberated, debated and agonized over this for many many many months. We kept hoping that a lot of the reasons why we were having these discussions in the first place would go away on their own. Some did, some did not, some got even further out of hand. As for the lack of soliciting input from Forum members, consider this. What if we did? What if we asked 20 of you what you thought? If 10 of you wanted to go in one direction and 10 of you in the other, or any numerical division for that matter; it would have created another headache in trying to appease those of you who did not get their way. Would you want that on your head? If not, shame on you for putting that on our four heads. There is an expression here in the US in regard to managers and coaches of professional sports teams. It goes like this; “If you keep acting on the wants and needs of the fans, you will end up sitting in the bleachers among them”. Meaning, you won’t have a job for very long because you will lose the vision of success you had for your operation.
You guys had months, everyone else on the forum was blindsided by this. (Though I think bad timing played a part). And if you guys announced it for discussion you would be able to calmly justify the reason for this and hear people’s opinions about the change. I don’t think their would be a headache in trying to appease people who didn’t get their way. I would be fine with the headache if it were to arise.
It could work like voting does in the U.S. Everyone votes for who they want but ultimately it is the electoral colleges decision on who the president is.
Taking about the forum change on the forum before hand should be in the last stages. And would be done with the knowledge that Joe is the ultimate deciding factor. I feel a pre change discussion will help ease things into the change.
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:
Zig, trcanberra6.34pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline Duly noted, Anna. Please believe me when I say our intent was not to blindside anyone. We will definitely take that into consideration before we announce we are disabling the PM system.
Belated April Fool!!
The following people thank Zig for this post:
parlance, BeatlebugTo the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
6.45pm
Moderators
15 February 2015
Offline Zig said
Duly noted, Anna. Please believe me when I say our intent was not to blindside anyone. We will definitely take that into consideration before we announce we are disabling the PM system.Belated April Fool!!
PHEEEEWWWWW!!!!!!!! You gave me a fright there for .00009 seconds.
The following people thank Beatlebug for this post:
Starr Shine?, Zig([{BRACKETS!}])
New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here.
If you love The Beatles Bible, and you have adblock, don't forget to white-list this site! 
6.53pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline Gah! So did your avatar. Feeling “negative” today, are we?
The following people thank Zig for this post:
Beatlebug, parlanceTo the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
4 Guest(s)