Messageboard
Notes and Queries permalink
Please
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Can you tell me *when* the budget for the message board moved from the programme budget to the online services budget? Or can you tell me where I can find out when it happened, please?
Obfuscation may mean that this question has vanished on the original query thread. -
Message 2
Posted by Barefoot - a Bit of a Handful (U14258080) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Rosie - I've asked it on the blog.
It seems to me that silence on this issue indicates that the budget has not migrated and that it is the production team who are driving the closure.
bc -
Message 3
Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Hi Rosie T
Please accept my apologies. I looked for the reference behind my earlier (2012) post and when I couldn't find it I checked with Keri. I've made a mistake here and assumed the budget was coming from the production team. I'll try and re post this where it's come up to hopefully clear up any confusion.
Tayler -
Message 4
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Thank you, Ms Creswell.
So, in April, you were wrong? Or were given the wrong information? -
Message 5
Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Hi Rosie
I think I was wrong. I can't find any emails or notes from the time about this, so I think I probably just assumed and didn't check the facts.
Tayler -
Message 6
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
So what is the point of Notes and Queries, if the Host "just assumes" ?
-
Message 7
Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
I do usually check my facts Rosie, I just can't remember where or why I made this assumption. Apologies.
Tayler -
Message 8
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
You could have said "I am sorry."
"Apologies" to me, means "poor substitutes or offerings "
And I feel completely let down. -
Message 9
Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Hi Rosie
I am really sorry. I hope you'll accept my apology. I certainly didn't mean to mislead anyone.
Tayler -
Message 10
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Yes, of course, Ms. Creswell. Thank you.
I am just not used to this board any more. -
Message 11
Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
It is nice to see you back again though, despite the circumstances.
Tayler -
Message 12
Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
I am really sorry. I hope you'll accept my apology. I certainly didn't mean to mislead anyone.Â
Though you claim that you were reckless and negligent by inventing an answer and presenting it as a fact? -
Message 13
Posted by fairweathersailer (U2505333) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Tayler made a mistake. All of us do - even you, I expect.
-
Message 14
Posted by Spartacus (U14243804) on Wednesday, 20th February 2013
Nigel Smith got the moderation cost wrong too a not a good day for facts in ML.
Makes you wonder how many more 'facts' are wrong. -
Message 15
Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Thursday, 21st February 2013
Tayler made a mistake. All of us do - even you, I expect.Â
I don't think she made a mistake.
I think the history has changed.
Are we at war with EastAsia or EurAsia?
And have we not always been? -
Message 16
Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Thursday, 21st February 2013
Hi OI
History wasn't changed. This really was my mistake.
Tayler -
Message 17
Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Thursday, 21st February 2013
Hi OI
History wasn't changed. This really was my mistake.
°Õ²¹²â±ô±ð°ùÌý
Of course Tayler.
Doubtless you recall the final line of "1984".
Whatever your present sincere recollection, I just cannot believe that you would have made such an explicit statement as to which bit of the Ö÷²¥´óÐã funded the boards without having been told that was the case by someone.
Your reliable response when you don't know is to say that you will ask!
I have been criticised eslethread for asking if you/Liberty 842 will suffer a reducction in income when the boards close. Are you willing to say?
Presumably they who may not be named will suffer almost 100% cut?
I wish we could be given some idea how much Ö÷²¥´óÐã will save from killing us off.
It is the perception that it is less than the DG's taxi bill that rankles. -
Message 18
Posted by cath (U2234232) on Saturday, 23rd February 2013
Don't shoot the messenger OI.
I don't think it matters where the MB budget comes from.
But I'd say that the cost issues would be /more/ critical rather than less if the MB is paid for from within the programme budget rather than an overarching internet budget - eg no MB = more TIs.
The fact that the MB has been so critical of the prod team obviously wouldn't have helped our case if you were making the decision from within the prodteam. But presumably their views would have been fed into any decision if the costs came from the internet side so it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. -
Message 19
Posted by rick_yard_withdrawn (U14573092) on Saturday, 23rd February 2013
Don't shoot the messenger OI.
I don't think it matters where the MB budget comes from.
But I'd say that the cost issues would be /more/ critical rather than less if the MB is paid for from within the programme budget rather than an overarching internet budget - eg no MB = more TIs.
The fact that the MB has been so critical of the prod team obviously wouldn't have helped our case if you were making the decision from within the prodteam. But presumably their views would have been fed into any decision if the costs came from the internet side so it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. But would it be better if the Board had survived at the expense of being a wall-to-wall paean of praise to the production team...? -
Message 20
Posted by cath (U2234232) on Saturday, 23rd February 2013
No, that would just be AA, wouldn't it? But there ought to be a balance between relentless praise and relentless slagging off - constructive criticism, where not everything is wonderful and not everything is dreadful.
I've become much more aware of the ups and downs of the MB as a result of my posting history delete-athon (which I finished today, praise be). It's been a sort of sine curve of ups and downs.
I was interested to find in the post WR/Sam days the same level of anger that we've had post SATTC. But the /quality/ of the anger was, I think, a bit different. All we've had over the last couple of years is slagging off the Ö÷²¥´óÐã and the prodteam - waste of money, lazy, disgraceful, VW, sws, actors, SLs are all rubbish etc. There's been no light and shade, it's been relentless. We didn't have much if any of that post WR/Sam, the anger was directed at the SL and dislike of characters. Poor Keri had a rotten time and I'm sorry to see that I played my part in that.
But the same arguments and discussions were taking place post WR/Sam; could the MB survive, should it, is the behaviour of established posters driving other people away?
Then things settled down again except that the real anti-Ö÷²¥´óÐã bias started taking root. And then we had SATTC. It's a shame because I really think TA has recovered from the misjudgements of that time and I've been enjoying it and hope to continue to enjoy it.
What I take from my quick canter through the last 6 and a bit years is that people do appreciate most of the SLs but the prodteam should be very wary of showing off and trying to get press coverage at the expense of the narrative. The WR/Sam SL was a disaster because it upset people who liked WR and couldn't understand why she would have had an affair with Sam and it upset people who dislike her because she didn't run off with him. Lose-lose.
Similarly with SATTC it upset people who liked Nigel and it upset people who dislike Helen. More lose-lose.
I do think TA is fundamentally sound and I wish it well. Just don't go chasing the ratings, please! -
Message 21
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Saturday, 23rd February 2013
I do think TA is fundamentally sound and I wish it well. Just don't go chasing the ratings, please!Â
Agree, and point well-argued (won't paste all of it again as there is enough cyber-ink flowing at the moment). -
Message 22
Posted by cath (U2234232) on Saturday, 23rd February 2013
Hi Bette, thanks. I've enjoyed all our discussions over the last few years.
About this Board
Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
This messageboard is now closed.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.