Goodbye UKBF and thanks for all the fish!

[Ethan39]

rather than correctly locate it, binned it.

We could not correctly relocate it. The Byre explicitly turned down being an author of editorial content on the site. Hence we could not transition his content into the editorial space.

Because of his own choices, his editorial content had no home on the platform. I did, in my response to his leaving post, note that the offer to have his editorial added to the correct place still stood if he wished to join as an editorial author; in his response, he said he was not interested. We would welcome him back to the platform with full editorial privileges if he wished it.

 

[Clodbuster]

Those toys really did get tossed out of the cot - a pity really.

 

[Financial-Modeller]

Thank you @Ozzy and @ctrlbrk for bringing The Byre's departure to my attention as I had evidently missed this thread when I started the other one.

FWiW I think the forum has lost / pushed one of the most erudite and intelligent contributors. Among other things I will miss his profound knowledge of economics with a perspective across economic cycles, explained succinctly and without commercial bias.

I have noted previously how disappointing it is - and frankly, offensive to the author - when someone has devoted time and effort to make a reasoned and intelligent contribution to the forum, which is then deleted in entirety by someone who - in some cases - doesn't even understand it!

On the other hand, I have also said a few times that the forum belongs to Ozzy, who can run it however he wants to, as he seeks to profit from it. Whether I and others agree with current policy as it moves around is largely irrelevant.

However it seems pretty obvious that contributors with something valuable to say will drift away from a forum with a policy proudly offering permission to speak under the guidance of a moderation policy, to https://substack.com or one of the other sites where the author has full control of their content and can monetise their content directly. Those remaining will by definition be those who do not have much of value to contribute. I have suggested that if that population is the more profitable one for UKBF in its current guise, it makes sound commercial sense for Ozzy to prioritise and monetise it.

On reflection - as one perilously close to becoming one of the grumpy old men - I've been freely providing opinion/advice for several years without any benefit, and am not sure that I will be able to add value going forward so will probably delete my account in the next few days too.

On a lighter note, I'll keep a look out for new member Fifi Lamour who I hope will join the forum soon.

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

On day one the thread did but once the article went up that overtook the thread and had more longevity in the results.

That wasn't the actual objective of the exercise. What we actually wanted to demonstrate was whether we could generate any enquiries for @JEREMY HAWKE off the back of our online real estate, so I asked my colleagues to reach out to Jeremy for expert comment and write an article to mop up the search traffic and monitor any click through traffic to Jeremy's comments and profile.

No it wouldn't, but equally we have not written any articles relating to much other debating opinion threads. We have however written many articles off the back of a question asked where the thread is started as a "this is effecting my business, help I need advice" type.T
Which is why I keep repeating, repeatedly, that the forum will be changing from a forum inserting comment of "it's current format".

Well according to Jeremy's comments above the exercise was a success.

The Tufnell's market was under-priced and crap
We however picked up about 2k per month worth of business from their customers that were selling quality products of value but wanted to up their customer experience levels Much of this came from the Tufnells thread and the following UKBF blog directing leads to us.
I am very grateful to @Ozzy and the team for demonstrating this .My business has gained from it and it goes to show that you will get back from this site what you put in to it

 

[Ozzy]

I've been freely providing opinion/advice for several years without any benefit, and am not sure that I will be able to add value going forward

Don't confuse giving advice or opinion on questions and advice being sought from business owners with "Unsolicited Advice" and Blog posting in the forums, the latter both of which has been against the rules of the site for several years long before I purchased this site back.

I had my team spend several hours setting up a whole section on the site called "The Bytorial" to show him what it could look like so his content could continue to be published within the rules of the site, content I completely agree is interesting and informative. I could not have a situation of one rule for one and another for everyone else, it would not be fair on the moderator nor other members.

Anyway, I'm just repeating what's already been said earlier in this thread. My main point is opinion/advice is one thing, posting unsolicited advice and posting blog style content has never been allowed.

 

[simon field]

Makes no sense whatsoever I’m afraid!

Who ‘solicits’ general advice? Nobody!

 

[MikeJ]

He didn't say "general advice".

 

[alan1302]

Makes no sense whatsoever I’m afraid!

Who ‘solicits’ general advice? Nobody!

The forum is for asking questions and people helping out.

The Byre used to post long articles with things he wanted to talk about - they should not have been where they were posted and he was told that. He was told they could be posted in a specific place but he was not happy about that - he decided to leave. Why do you not understand that?

 

[alan1302]

The 'Village Pub' would close if the regulars were seen 'unfit' by the pub landlord and decided to leave.

If the landlord wants to turn the Village Pub into a KFC, that's fine, and will be a whole new ball game with new actors, good or bad?

With just the regulars the village pub will close as it does not pay its way. It needs to change to pay for itself.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

With just the regulars the village pub will close as it does not pay its way. It needs to change to pay for itself.

Which was probably the view of many of the owners of the 7,000 pubs that have closed in the past 10 years.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

The forum is for asking questions and people helping out.

The Byre used to post long articles with things he wanted to talk about - they should not have been where they were posted and he was told that. He was told they could be posted in a specific place but he was not happy about that - he decided to leave. Why do you not understand that?

Why weren't they and why haven't they been removed then?

Maybe because the vast majority were posted on the TIME OUT forum where leeway to chat is allowed?

 

[alan1302]

Why weren't they and why haven't they been removed then?

Maybe because the vast majority were posted on the TIME OUT forum where leeway to chat is allowed?

It's mentioned in the posts somewhere above I think that he had been given leeway with his posts, but told he could no longer post them as they are against the forum rules. So he left.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

It's mentioned in the posts somewhere above I think that he had been given leeway with his posts, but told he could no longer post them as they are against the forum rules. So he left.

So will the Byres posts now be removed?

 

[alan1302]

So will the Byres posts now be removed?

You will need to ask the mods/Ozzy about that.

 

[MOIC]

With just the regulars the village pub will close as it does not pay its way. It needs to change to pay for itself.

The critic of UKBF posts has awoken!

Add new sections by all means, but don’t diminish the value of the Forum and/or its long term, experienced and valuable members, posters and thread contributors which is why UKBF was an attraction to readers and newbie posters.

Yes, there were a (very) few newbie posters who were ‘upset’ by some comments, but in the main they were factual and borne from experience of the poster.

This forum isn’t mumsnet and nor should it be a platform to give a newbie a ‘cuddle’ and false truths.

Keep the bar and the regulars, just open a restaurant section. There’s enough space.

 

[MOIC]

The forum is for asking questions and people helping out.

The Byre used to post long articles with things he wanted to talk about - they should not have been where they were posted and he was told that. He was told they could be posted in a specific place but he was not happy about that - he decided to leave. Why do you not understand that?

You miss the point of The Byre’s posts entirely (no surprise there). Adding context and experience to an answer gives credence and authority to the reply. They were always factual and those that could be bothered to read, would appreciate the post.

This is a forum, not a yes/no section or answers confined to 60 letters.

 

[fisicx]

You miss the point of The Byre’s posts entirely (no surprise there). Adding context and experience to an answer gives credence and authority to the reply. They were always factual and those that could be bothered to read, would appreciate the post.

This is a forum, not a yes/no section or answers confined to 60 letters.

Nobody is questioning the usefulness of his threads. It was just the location. Articles are not permitted in the forum.

 

[Ethan39]

So will the Byres posts now be removed?

I posted the below in my initial message on this thread.

Any editorial content outside of this section is not something that we allow. Any historic threads, such as your previous "Byretorial" posts haven't been removed mainly because they existed before we moved all editorial content to the Community Writer's section.

So no, we don't have any plans to remove the historic editorial content that The Byre posted.

 

[simon field]

He didn't say "general advice".

Petty

 

[MikeJ]

No it isn't. Once you remove the word "general" from your statement, it reads

Who ‘solicits’ advice? Nobody!

Which is laughably stupid.

 

[MOIC]

Nobody is questioning the usefulness of his threads. It was just the location. Articles are not permitted in the forum.

Sounds like what you would expect from a forum in China.

 

[fisicx]

Sounds like what you would expect from a forum in China.

Have you even read the replies from @Ozzy and @Ethan39?

There is a place for the articles TheByre writes. Just not the main forum.

 

[MOIC]

Have you even read the replies from @Ozzy and @Ethan39?

Have I?

An insult in disguise.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Have you even read the replies from @Ozzy and @Ethan39?

There is a place for the articles TheByre writes. Just not the main forum.

I would never have seen them!

 

[fisicx]

I would never have seen them!

If you get the UKBF newsletter you would know about the articles. If you aren’t interested in the newsletter you aren’t the target. It’s was @Ozzy has been alluding to. Most of the forum old guard aren’t part of the BDG plan.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Most of the forum old guard aren’t part of the BDG plan.

That's a pretty damning statement.

Who or what determines the 'Old Guard'?

 

[fisicx]

Who or what determines the 'Old Guard'?

@Ozzy does. He has a plan and the forum is a very minor part of that plan. He has explained it in this and other threads.

 

[alan1302]

The critic of UKBF posts has awoken!

Add new sections by all means, but don’t diminish the value of the Forum and/or its long term, experienced and valuable members, posters and thread contributors which is why UKBF was an attraction to readers and newbie posters.

Yes, there were a (very) few newbie posters who were ‘upset’ by some comments, but in the main they were factual and borne from experience of the poster.

This forum isn’t mumsnet and nor should it be a platform to give a newbie a ‘cuddle’ and false truths.

Keep the bar and the regulars, just open a restaurant section. There’s enough space.

The bar and regulars are what are causing the issues for Ozzy paying the bills - it changes ot it goes. If Google is not showing as much content due to some of what happens in the Time Out forum why would you think Ozzy should keep it going?

 

[alan1302]

You miss the point of The Byre’s posts entirely (no surprise there). Adding context and experience to an answer gives credence and authority to the reply. They were always factual and those that could be bothered to read, would appreciate the post.

This is a forum, not a yes/no section or answers confined to 60 letters.

Ozzy has explained why the posts are no longer allowed in the forum as they are - have you missed that part of the dicussion? I perfectly undeerstand The Byre's posts - I find it shame he no longer wanted to post but that is is decision.

 

[alan1302]

Have I?

An insult in disguise.

You do appear not to have read them or are deliveratly ignoring what they say.

 

[MOIC]

The bar and regulars are what are causing the issues for Ozzy paying the bills - it changes ot it goes. If Google is not showing as much content due to some of what happens in the Time Out forum why would you think Ozzy should keep it going?

It’s not Time Out that’s the issue. It’s the fact that there is zero regard to business members or indeed regular posters who give or have given sound advice.

“The forums are not in BDG plans”

I can’t remember ONE post on which you have offered advice, instead your posts are geared to critisising other posts.

Go back to sleep.

 

[alan1302]

It’s not Time Out that’s the issue. It’s the fact that there is zero regard to business members or indeed regular posters who give or have given sound advice.

“The forums are not in BDG plans”

I can’t remember ONE post on which you have offered advice, instead your posts are geared to critisising other posts.

Go back to sleep.

And posters like you are a problem that stops new users staying with your pathetic condecending attitiude and an unwillingness to have a proper discussion unless people agree with you.

 

[MOIC]

And posters like you are a problem that stops new users staying with your pathetic condecending attitiude and an unwillingness to have a proper discussion unless people agree with you.

Touché

Give advice Alan, that's what a forum is for, not to let your anger out.

I think I give fair , balanced and sound advice to any threads I post on . . . . . . . except one's that just criticise for the sake of it on every post.

 

[alan1302]

I think I give fair , balanced and sound advice to any threads I post on . . . . . . . except one's that just criticise for the sake of it on every post.

Except I have not critised on this thread - just pointed out the reaons why things are changing...that's not criticsims.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

If Google is not showing as much content due to some of what happens in the Time Out forum why would you think Ozzy should keep it going?

TIME OUT has the second highest number of messages, 384,000, after General Business.

 

[alan1302]

TIME OUT has the second highest number of messages, 384,000, after General Business.

Which highlights the issue - this is a business site, you need the business articles to be higher up. Not the general chit chat section.

 

[MOIC]

And posters like you are a problem that stops new users staying with your pathetic condecending attitiude and an unwillingness to have a proper discussion unless people agree with you.

Except I have not critised on this thread - just pointed out the reaons why things are changing...that's not criticsims.

That’s criticism. Your trait.

 

[alan1302]

That's a truth - not criticism

 

[MOIC]

That's a truth - not criticism

You need to get out more.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Which highlights the issue - this is a business site, you need the business articles to be higher up. Not the general chit chat section.

You may want the business articles to be higher up but in business you deal with reality first. Dismissing discussions as chit chat suggests you've never been to a networking event?