ADUK Archive

akirk wrote:oooh now locked down so that you have to join the group to see posts - we will never know what is being said and 3 members now

Alasdair

Sounds like a good reason not to join then. If he does not want the content to be generally seen, makes me wonder what his motivation is for setting up the FB page.

akirk wrote:oooh now locked down so that you have to join the group to see posts - we will never know what is being said and 3 members now

Remind me (or perhaps the OP could), this was to increase awareness?

2 members...assuming they are different people...

Personally I see nothing wrong with an AD Facebook group.

However, I think it needs to try to co-exist with this forum rather than compete with it. Forums and Facebook group are both great platforms, and each have their own advantages and disadvantages. You can't really say one is right and one is wrong.

In the various recent threads on this matter, no one has really explained their reasons for being so against signing up to Facebook. If you're worried about privacy, don't give any information that you don't have to (I think all that's required is an email address, password and your name). Heck, if you're worried about telling Facebook your name just make one up / use your forum name.

The main reason I'm defending this idea is that I jointly administer a very successful university club that relies solely on Facebook for its running. We have a 'page' which promotes the club, and once someone joins they are added to our 'secret' Facebook group. This is where all online discussion takes place, including organisation of many events through (you guessed it), Facebook events. It's a brilliant platform and we'd genuinely of struggled to run the club as efficiently without it - it's so simple for anyone to use (I'd say more technophobe-friendly than a forum - compare how easy it is to upload a picture for instance) and free to use (well, I know Facebook make their money from advertising but that takes us out of the monetary transactions of taking money from website advertisers to paying hosting, maintenance and design fees).

I slightly wish 'petes' hadn't started the group, because now nobody will join to make a point. If one of the more established members had started it I'm sure it would've more successful with members here. Cheers petes

jameslb101 wrote:Lots of very balanced stuff

Like

The only person who can start a joint page / group is the forum owner, though. And he doesn't choose to do so.

Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:Like

The only person who can start a joint page / group is the forum owner, though. And he doesn't choose to do so.

Not sure about the legals, but I agree, ethically it would be wrong to start a Facebook page with the same name as this forum, without the owners blessing. From what I can see he's pretty uninvolved these days, so let's rule this option out.

Wouldn't take much imagination to come up with a different name though would it...

jameslb101 wrote:In the various recent threads on this matter, no one has really explained their reasons for being so against signing up to Facebook.

I think a few of us have - for variations between "see no reason to" and "really don't want to" with a fairly large dose of "not like this" and "not by you" to cement the issue.

But take a couple of steps back.

Why do this at all?

In the two attempts to do so that I have seen there hasn't really been a clear explanation of why this would be of benefit. The way it has been portrayed has been that FB is better and that we should migrate over there.

There hasn't really been a strong case made for running in parallel.

There doesn't appear to have been much acknowledgment of what makes ADUK work so well in its current form - IMHO a combination of a very passionate, knowledgeable and above all, generous people who actually meet up regularly to put this stuff into practice.

This forum might not be as busy as say, PH, but if your primary goal is to increase audience size then just posting there not here would be the quickest way to achieve that. Ironically, simply setting up another group risks diluting the interest below the critical mass needed for any online community to survive.

So why do anything different?

An unfounded desire for change for the sake of it? We missed the MySpace revolution so don't miss the FaceBook one too?

Maybe a clearer proposition of what and why and how things would be improved would get more interest.

Then there is the where. As someone has mentioned, FaceSpace does not equal Social Media.

Twitter, Whatsapp, LinkedIn and probably others (Pintrest anyone?) might have something to offer but surely a stronger case needs to be made for what will be improved.

Carbon Based wrote:This forum might not be as busy as say, PH, ...

This forum has more than twice the number of threads than that of the PH advanced driving forum, more than twice the number of threads than that of the IAM forum. How does it compare with the RoADAR forum?

The main complaint seems to be that some people think there isn't enough activity here - I'm not sure how more activity would benefit the complainants other than by providing them with more free entertainment ... It's been notable that the two main advocates of change have been newcomers who turned out to be less concerned with advanced driving than wishing to inflict changes on existing users of this forum, and who haven't stuck around to take an active part here.

Carbon Based wrote:

jameslb101 wrote:In the various recent threads on this matter, no one has really explained their reasons for being so against signing up to Facebook.

I think a few of us have - for variations between "see no reason to" and "really don't want to"...

I wonder how many people said that about the concept of an AD forum / the internet at large before they gave it a go...

Carbon Based wrote:Why do this at all?

Because there are lots of people on Facebook who are interested in AD who "see no reason to" and "really don't want to" join a dedicated forum.

Carbon Based wrote:In the two attempts to do so that I have seen there hasn't really been a clear explanation of why this would be of benefit. The way it has been portrayed has been that FB is better and that we should migrate over there.

Not better, just different.

Carbon Based wrote:There hasn't really been a strong case made for running in parallel

I suppose that's what I'm suggesting then. Not passionate enough to set it up myself but I'd join if it was present and active.

Carbon Based wrote:There doesn't appear to have been much acknowledgment of what makes ADUK work so well in its current form - IMHO a combination of a very passionate, knowledgeable and above all, generous people who actually meet up regularly to put this stuff into practice.

No reason why that wouldn't happen on a Facebook group either.

Carbon Based wrote:This forum might not be as busy as say, PH, but if your primary goal is to increase audience size then just posting there not here would be the quickest way to achieve that. Ironically, simply setting up another group risks diluting the interest below the critical mass needed for any online community to survive.

As we're in the process of figuring out, maybe they're two slightly separate audiences. Maybe people who get involved in one would then be inspired to join the other. Maybe it would be a good way of reaching out to a different (dare I say younger) audience. I'd certainly like to see more new faces on ADUK days.

Carbon Based wrote:Then there is the where. As someone has mentioned, FaceSpace does not equal Social Media.

Twitter, Whatsapp, LinkedIn and probably others (Pintrest anyone?) might have something to offer but surely a stronger case needs to be made for what will be improved.

Can't really see Twitter, Whatsapp, LinkedIn and others working as appropriate platforms. Facebook, I can.

As I said, I don't care enough about the issue to do anything about, but just felt this side of the argument was slightly under represented. I'm not claiming this forum doesn't work or has had its day, but it would be nice to attract new blood, and perhaps people closer to my age.

It's all overthinking it.

FB is a fine platform. FB group(s) and a forum are not mutually exclusive. It doesn't matter whether any individual likes it or is interested, it matters whether anyone else out there does. We all have a common interest and we shouldn't be attacking one another for trying to further its breadth.

However, trying to create a community as a bitter reaction and/or by splintering another one is not a great recipe for success.

For me the big issue is that I don't want another location to look for discussion on the same topic - I happily use facebook for personal things, I would rather keep them split... Fine, yes use Facebook as a funnel to bring people here, but unless there is a very good reason, you will end up either with duplication, or the same overall issues being discussed by two parts of the same community in two places - doesn't work... And there are a lot of good reasons to keep discussions away from Facebook believing that they own them

If Darren wants facebook, then that is his decision - and if he should I will pass over the registration of Advanced Driving UK on facebook which was made to avoid someone else getting it otherwise, it will remain dormant, or if I ever get round to it I might just point it here!

Alasdair

akirk wrote:
If Darren wants facebook, then that is his decision - and if he should I will pass over the registration of Advanced Driving UK on facebook which was made to avoid someone else getting it otherwise, it will remain dormant, or if I ever get round to it I might just point it here!

Alasdair

It's ridiculous the way you all suck up to this Darren bloke like he's your spiritual leader or something! He doesn't even use this site anymore. I've come across people like him before: buy a domain name, point it to a cheap and cheerful form, plaster it full of Google Ads, then disappear from the scene.

Disappointing that you feel it appropriate to cyber squat a Facebook address. Imagine if you discovered "alisdairkirk" was taken by someone else? Most frustrating

petes wrote:It's ridiculous the way you all suck up to this Darren bloke like he's your spiritual leader or something!

It's like you are bitter, or something.

petes wrote:He doesn't even use this site anymore.

His last forum login was a couple of days ago.

petes wrote:I've come across people like him before: buy a domain name, point it to a cheap and cheerful form, plaster it full of Google Ads, then disappear from the scene.

Presumably you mean 'forum', rather than 'form' - no adverts in the forum, and I count only two on the main page.

petes wrote:Disappointing that you feel it appropriate to cyber squat a Facebook address. Imagine if you discovered "alisdairkirk" was taken by someone else? Most frustrating

Perhaps it would have more effect if a Facebook account was created using his name ... which can hardly be said to be the case for your implied complaint.

Would it be too much to ask you to grow up a bit?

petes wrote:

akirk wrote:
If Darren wants facebook, then that is his decision - and if he should I will pass over the registration of Advanced Driving UK on facebook which was made to avoid someone else getting it otherwise, it will remain dormant, or if I ever get round to it I might just point it here!

Alasdair

It's ridiculous the way you all suck up to this Darren bloke like he's your spiritual leader or something! He doesn't even use this site anymore. I've come across people like him before: buy a domain name, point it to a cheap and cheerful form, plaster it full of Google Ads, then disappear from the scene.

Disappointing that you feel it appropriate to cyber squat a Facebook address. Imagine if you discovered "alisdairkirk" was taken by someone else? Most frustrating

I think the fundamental difference is that we are being polite courteous and civilised.

Hardly cybersquatting to register a name for its intended use - either by Darren or myself - you perhaps aren't aware that cybersquatting means taking someone else's IP in the form of a domain / URL with the intention of in essence blackmailing them into purchase, or using it to compete in breach of trademark... The difference here is that I am protecting IP from misuse

as for someone registering something I would like - if it was my IP then I would pursue them as I have done successfully in the past - it is not mine, but a valid registration then I would move on and nto worry about it...
however as Gareth points out, I wouldn't worry about mis-spellings of my name...

I really think that you need to get over your issues with others on this forum - look back at how people responded - it was with politeness and courtesy - it was only once you started to demonstrate a lot of antagonism towards those who had perfectly valid alternative views to yours that the replies became more robust...

as I said initially when you were talking about Facebook, I think it is a good idea to spread the discussion about AD and facebook would add to that - the negative was that I didn't feel that a member of a forum had the right to 'take that forum' to another technology, using its brand and IP - it would of course be an illegal use of their IP - but to do your own project under a different name - no issue...

so why not just get on with it instead of fighting people who aren't interested in that fight...

Alasdair