There have been a number of posts recently (from mostly anonymous posters, some of whom may not be 1874 supporters) where the motives behind the posts have not been clear but, could be seen as destructive criticism of the 1874 management team and off field support. We all have different opinions of how things could be differently handled , but the minority of posters, who jump at the chance of criticising the team/ call for a change of Manager etc when we have a poor result, are letting the Club down when they fail to propose constructive views of what could be done to improve matters. The number of "likes" of such posts is invariably confined to a very small minority and it seems to me that there is a need for a "dislike" button on posts so that the silent majority (who are very happy with the way in which the Club's affairs are conducted) can have their say without necessarily posting a full response of their own. This will, perhaps, enable our excellent Manager and all 1874 helpers to see that their efforts are appreciated and that they have the support of the vast majority of fans. Is it possible for the sites to encompass such a feature ? We run the risk of losing valuable support,on and off the field, if the minority views are allowed to prevail.
Responses to Posts
- Thread starter archie
- Start date
- Aug 4, 2013
- 1,157
- 563
Think your idea has some merit, Archie, and should be considered.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 2,920
- 1,826
Edge is your man as to whether a "dislike" button is a possibility or not. However if it were possible and added to the forum tools, we all have accept that we all run the risk of our cooments being actively "disliked" as opposed to just simply being ignored, as they would under the forum's present position.
With regard to some of the negative posters perhaps not being 1874 fans?.... Sorry, you are barking up the wrong tree I'm afraid. No evidence that any recent poster with a counter opinion or "likes" a post offering a counter opinion (aside of declared Witton fans) is anything other than a '74 fan.
With regard to some of the negative posters perhaps not being 1874 fans?.... Sorry, you are barking up the wrong tree I'm afraid. No evidence that any recent poster with a counter opinion or "likes" a post offering a counter opinion (aside of declared Witton fans) is anything other than a '74 fan.
Last edited:
- Jun 24, 2013
- 5,683
- 3,379
There's nothing built in to the forum by default.
You can choose to ignore posts by clicking on a members name & clicking ignore. You can't ignore the mods though
There is an addon priced at £20 that will allow like/dislike and other post feedback. If there's enough interest then we'll purchase it.
You can choose to ignore posts by clicking on a members name & clicking ignore. You can't ignore the mods though
There is an addon priced at £20 that will allow like/dislike and other post feedback. If there's enough interest then we'll purchase it.
I do get what you are saying but show me a forum anywhere in Britain where people don't comment when a team loses. It's just the way the game is. I have seen nothing that I have felt oversteps the mark, just people voicing opinions.
I think we can also run the risk of becoming a bit self-righteous about being a fan run club and shouting down people who arent 100% positive all the time.
Maybe the dislike button is a good compromise.
I think we can also run the risk of becoming a bit self-righteous about being a fan run club and shouting down people who arent 100% positive all the time.
Maybe the dislike button is a good compromise.
Couldn't agree more.
I'm anonymous (in name, happy to prove/show who I am though as stated on previous threads) and can definitely say I'm more defensive of Street than certain well known members both on the forum and at games.
And bare in mind, the dislike feature will just give people with differing views to yourself Archie.. you may be able to dislike stuff that you don't agree with.. but the person who's posted it will disagree with you - so all that with happen is you'll end up with a dislike each!
I so strongly disagree with your view about people letting the club down if they have certain views Archie. No matter what there viewpoint is on Street, the stadium etc - if there a fan there a fan - they're spending their hard earned money and are entitled to a view.
To turn it on it's head a little - what about people who can't make it to many games - should they be disallowed a view because they don't go? Of course not.
I know someone who goes every game who isn't happy with performances and tactics (not me nor my view, and not for this thread) - but your post Archie implys that people who have a certain view point are the better fans, even if they go to perhaps one game a season - oppose to someone who is critical who goes every game?
My view is simple; if you go to every game, if you can only make it to 1 game, if you are a 'everything's always perfect' fan or a critical fan - every single category is a fan and this club needs every single one of them.
Because you disagree or don't know who they are does not make them any less of a fan and certainly does not mean there letting the club down.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,400
- 2,345
A bit devil's advocate here ... I've never much liked the use of the "silent majority" argument in any context - if they are "silent" you have no way of knowing that they are "very happy", Archie. Though that perhaps explains why threads after victories are shorter than after defeats.
Good post, Hi Jean. I too disagree with Archie that people who post 'negative' opinions aren't fans and are somehow letting the club down. In short, they aren't and are fans just like anyone else.
No one from what I've seen has questioned Street's commitment to the club or the hard work of volunteers and officials. However, what they have questioned is some of our poor performances such as against Winsford, something which as a paying customer, they have every right to do. It's not as if praise isn't given to the lads and management when they play well.
I'd hate to see an independent fans forum turned into a place where you can only post praise or 'positive' comments that toe the line of the club and where everyone agrees with one another. That is not what this forum should be about and nor does it stand for the ethos and values of OUR club.
No one from what I've seen has questioned Street's commitment to the club or the hard work of volunteers and officials. However, what they have questioned is some of our poor performances such as against Winsford, something which as a paying customer, they have every right to do. It's not as if praise isn't given to the lads and management when they play well.
I'd hate to see an independent fans forum turned into a place where you can only post praise or 'positive' comments that toe the line of the club and where everyone agrees with one another. That is not what this forum should be about and nor does it stand for the ethos and values of OUR club.
- Jul 28, 2013
- 3,008
- 2,330
The only two people I've seen post anonymously and trying to cause trouble regarding something as petty as the use of Surenames, trying to make out that I'm disrespectful because they didn't like the fact I'm being critical. And they are:
John Lilburne - An English politician from the 1600's.
Atticus Finch - A fictional character from the Novel, to Kill a Mockingbird
The problem with the forum isn't that fact that people are critical when it's deserved, the problem is peoples reactions to those criticisms.
John Lilburne - An English politician from the 1600's.
Atticus Finch - A fictional character from the Novel, to Kill a Mockingbird
The problem with the forum isn't that fact that people are critical when it's deserved, the problem is peoples reactions to those criticisms.
- Nov 12, 2016
- 197
- 218
And one of the above is a board member
And one of the above is a board member
A board member posting under an anonymous name?
This shows that the club see this as absolutely fine as they are permitting this - so can this please be the end to the argument of anonymous posters trying to 'destabilise and letting the club down' now as even the club allow officials to use anonymous names - and I would be astounded and angry if anyone were to accuse any board member of letting the club down as it is completely not true.
I think this does show what a number of people on here believe - if someone posts all rosy and no negative AND there anonymous it's fine - but if an anonymous posts something that's not rosy it's unacceptable - it smacks of double standards.
What I do find rather concerning is that a board member is posting attacking a member (Andy) for the use of Streets surname as it's petty, and is done purely to undermine a valued contributor to this forum - this would be concerning if they were using anonymous or using their full name.
Can we please just leave this constant merry go round of negative v positive and anonymous v non - anonymous?
A forum is the place for praise, thoughts, criticisms (if not personal or petty) - there's more discussion about what people are allowed to think or say than anything football related at the moment.
Last edited:
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,400
- 2,345
That was not a Board member.
I don't know if it is or isn't a board member - all I can go off is an above post where joining the 100 says explicitly it's a board member.
They are anonymous, do we agree?
Can you confirm if you know who the 2 accounts belong to in real life?
If not, then your in the same boat as me and can only rely on joining the 100's post too.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 868
- 1,090
Wooaahhh!!! Bit of misunderstanding!
Joining the 100 Plus referenced two people that had suggested Streety shouldn't be referred to in a particular way. He didn't say they had suggested people shouldn't use pseudonyms... just that they were using pseudonyms themselves.
As far I can tell - without trawling through tons of posts at 23:20 - a board member hasn't made an issue of using pseudonyms. Others have done but I don't think they're board members.
But Hi Jean, I totally agree, can we please just get off this merry-go-round?
People can use any name they like on the forum so long as they're not trying to impersonate anyone else or the name is offensive to others. Choosing to use a pseudonym doesn't make that person's opinion any more or less valid than someone who chooses to use their own name.
How about everyone just adopts more of a live and let live philosophy? We're all '74 fans; we may have different views but I'd like to feel we all have the same agenda.
__________________________________
That's a line drawn under it!
Joining the 100 Plus referenced two people that had suggested Streety shouldn't be referred to in a particular way. He didn't say they had suggested people shouldn't use pseudonyms... just that they were using pseudonyms themselves.
As far I can tell - without trawling through tons of posts at 23:20 - a board member hasn't made an issue of using pseudonyms. Others have done but I don't think they're board members.
But Hi Jean, I totally agree, can we please just get off this merry-go-round?
People can use any name they like on the forum so long as they're not trying to impersonate anyone else or the name is offensive to others. Choosing to use a pseudonym doesn't make that person's opinion any more or less valid than someone who chooses to use their own name.
How about everyone just adopts more of a live and let live philosophy? We're all '74 fans; we may have different views but I'd like to feel we all have the same agenda.
__________________________________
That's a line drawn under it!
- Jul 28, 2013
- 3,008
- 2,330
Well said Nicki.
We all have the same agenda, which is our club is successful on and off the pitch.
The accusations that people who dare criticise as having hidden agendas does no good.
The petty round about of should we or shouldn't we be critical does no good.
The petty nit picking over the use of surenames does no good.
It's time we all put our big boy pants on, and realised this is a public football forum, there will be people who see the world differently to you. But guess what, they've still got the same end goal as you.
We all have the same agenda, which is our club is successful on and off the pitch.
The accusations that people who dare criticise as having hidden agendas does no good.
The petty round about of should we or shouldn't we be critical does no good.
The petty nit picking over the use of surenames does no good.
It's time we all put our big boy pants on, and realised this is a public football forum, there will be people who see the world differently to you. But guess what, they've still got the same end goal as you.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,400
- 2,345
And for final clarification - yes, I do know the identity of the two referenced individuals posting under pseudonyms, otherwise I would not have stated that the one criticising Andy's use of "Street" was not a Board member.
For all you know, AlanM is a pseudonym too.
Merry-go-round put to bed, I hope.
For all you know, AlanM is a pseudonym too.
Merry-go-round put to bed, I hope.
Nicki, no board member has made an issue of the use of pseudonyms - BUT the 2 members identified as a possible board members by joining the 100 uses a pseudonym - my point was that if a board member is using a pseudonym then they deem it okay - completely discounting Archie's point re if you use a pseudonym your some how less of a fan.
My issue was more than a board member (if it is one) is taking petty shots at Andy.
I agree fully with your post - just wanted to clarify what I was trying to say
Completely agree with your line in the sand, but sadly I think certain members won't adopt the live and let live philosophy (see the resurrection of the Camel Laird thread).