If you bought out TV Forum, what changes would you make?
I have been thinking about doing this if I come into money, and have decided:
1. Redesign the site with an entirely new colour scheme and logo.
2. Demote Charlie Wells with immediate effect.
3. Reinstate popular members who have been unfortunate to be banned for banal reasons (such as James Martin and Equidem)
4. The registration of new members during July and August would be stopped in an attempt to curb the issue of "summer holiday trolling."
5. Other new members would have to be moderation-approved in an attempt to improve the quality of posts.
6. Introduce a fair set of rules instead of the two-tier rule system that appears to be currently in operation.
TV Forum: You're The Boss
-
Slagathor.
- Banned
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Sun 15 Jul, 2007 15.36
1. Easy-to-read blue and white? Out. Garish lime green-and-red? In!
2. All "new members" (read: anyone who joined this month) can only make one post a day, as they are all annoying twats who post horrible mocks :roll:
3. All oldbies who've taken up residence at TVF since 2001 become mods.
4. No mocks forum.
2. All "new members" (read: anyone who joined this month) can only make one post a day, as they are all annoying twats who post horrible mocks :roll:
3. All oldbies who've taken up residence at TVF since 2001 become mods.
4. No mocks forum.
-
Anonymous
Agreed. I would also remove Mock Designs, as well as re-merge the Newsroom and the TV Forum.
I would also be interested in closing Metropol and bringing full integration back into TVF.
This is because I feel quality of posting has dwindled on both sides since 2003 - obviously the move was a bid to make the telly talk more hardcore, but instead the average IQ (and age) of members seems to have quite literally taken a tumble.
Maybe even a new name entirely?
With that in mind, I'd also open a radio forum, and the chat room would also be returned with a view to recreating its late 2001 heyday.
I would also be interested in closing Metropol and bringing full integration back into TVF.
This is because I feel quality of posting has dwindled on both sides since 2003 - obviously the move was a bid to make the telly talk more hardcore, but instead the average IQ (and age) of members seems to have quite literally taken a tumble.
Maybe even a new name entirely?
With that in mind, I'd also open a radio forum, and the chat room would also be returned with a view to recreating its late 2001 heyday.
-
jrothwell97
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Mon 25 Jun, 2007 21.37
Go away James Martin. Is that two aliases you've used now?
Nick Harvey wrote: If I was one of those people who regularly changed my signature™, I think I'd use that quote in it for a while.
-
Anonymous
James Martin? Where? I don't see him.jrothwell97 wrote:Go away James Martin. Is that two aliases you've used now?
-
jrothwell97
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Mon 25 Jun, 2007 21.37
Explain why the reasons James Martin was banned are invalid then.Ron Owen wrote:James Martin? Where? I don't see him.jrothwell97 wrote:Go away James Martin. Is that two aliases you've used now?
Nick Harvey wrote: If I was one of those people who regularly changed my signature™, I think I'd use that quote in it for a while.
TV Forum is Asa's baby. He'd never open it up to any kind of democratic system where moderators are selected upon their aptitude and knowledge.
It's all very dated and inconsequential now. The proliferation of presentation websites has decreased a lot for the simple reason that it's far easier and more convienient to watch videos on YouTube. In fact, I'd estimate that around 80% of TV Ark's old content is now on YouTube. I'd be very surprised if the people behind TV Ark actually even bothered to complete their excrutiatingly long revamp (almost a year now).
It's all very dated and inconsequential now. The proliferation of presentation websites has decreased a lot for the simple reason that it's far easier and more convienient to watch videos on YouTube. In fact, I'd estimate that around 80% of TV Ark's old content is now on YouTube. I'd be very surprised if the people behind TV Ark actually even bothered to complete their excrutiatingly long revamp (almost a year now).
-
Anonymous
He said something derogatory about a Big Brother contestant - if Tumble Dryer had done it there'd be a slap on the wrist but because it was Charlie Wells he thought he'd be all big and ban him instead.
Another reason why Charlie Wells HAS to go.
Another reason why Charlie Wells HAS to go.
-
B.E. El-Zebub
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Tue 30 Aug, 2005 01.31
- Location: Gorsaf Betws-y-Coed
Hmm. A couple of weeks ago you were describing JM as a "waste of space",Ron Owen wrote:He said something derogatory about a Big Brother contestant - if Tumble Dryer had done it there'd be a slap on the wrist but because it was Charlie Wells he thought he'd be all big and ban him instead.
Another reason why Charlie Wells HAS to go.
Now you're complaining about the moderation on TVF on his behalf. Hmm.Ron Owen wrote:I'm certainly nothing to do with that waste of space.
Thank you very much.
Mae fy hofrenfad yn llawn o lyswennod
-
Ronnie Rowlands
- Posts: 956
- Joined: Sun 15 Apr, 2007 14.50
- Location: North Wales
Why should every member from 2001 be a moderator? You don't need that many! Although I agree about Charlie Wells, Isonstine and Itsrobert are fine as moderators, and we don't need an overrunn of staff, that can only cause mod wars. And you know James Martin was never popular, all the more reason to know that you are the man himself.
Ronnie is victorious, vivacious in victory like a venomous dog. Vile Republicans cease living while the religious retort with rueful rhetoric. These rank thugs resort to violence and swear revenge.
But Ronnie can punch through steel so they lose anyway.
But Ronnie can punch through steel so they lose anyway.