Post a Reply
Back to the Forum
Whoah! You left..?!
by Whistler
(quotes)
I agree completely.
Which is why I left T21. The only reason I'm back is because of your DJ entry.
Posted: 03:01 Apr 03 2006
The whole 'site thing'...
Note for those who missed it (lucky blighters): this thread started as a debate about religious tolerance, and tailed off into discussion about the future of the site.
original post
First titled "Goddamn Atheists!"
Atheists are anti-American, says a survery by the University of Minnesota. Apparently "Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in 'sharing their vision of American society'." Seems diversity is fine so long as you have shared "core values", and one of those is religious belief.
Strangest of all, Atheism's associated with an "array of moral indiscretions ranging from criminal behavior to rampant materialism". Rampant materialism?! Leaving aside the obvious irony of mainstream America criticising anyone for being mall whores, most Atheists I've met are fair-trade ethically sourced mung-bean types whose criminal behavior extends to a cheeky spliff after the red wine's run out.
Still, depressing as it is, good to see more evidence of the religious drawing battlelines with non-believers. About time Atheists and free-thinkers follow Richard Dawkins' fine example, end their silence, and vigorously attack the dangerous folly of religious belief in all its forms.
(Edited by Byron 21/04/2006 00:00)
later edit
I realise the last paragraph was aggressively worded and apologise for any needless offence caused. A less crusading summary of my position would be:- The old Liberal convention that you shouldn't criticise or promote religion in public has broken down; but we shouldn't return to it. I see why it came about, but changes to society mean those reasons no longer apply, and its insistence on treating religious faith as a private matter outside the scope of public comment is unrealistic; and unfair, both to believers wanting to publicise a faith and non-believers wanting to criticise it.
Posted: 03:01 Apr 03 2006 
In response to the actual topic - While America has a reputation for fundamentalism, you have to also remember that in many smaller US towns the Church is the centre of the community and most communal activities are based there - local fundraising, picnics, fetes etc. Therefore if you don't go to church and don't participate it could appear as though you are separated from the community as a whole.
While I don't personally believe in a Deity as such, I wholeheartedly support people's right to believe what they choose.
On the "subtopic" of debates and T21, I think that while lively debate is healthy, what happens here is kinda not. Let me expand a little - people blame journals for the demise of the site and I think that's wrong. What people post on their journals is totally different to the sort of thing people used to post here. I've had a journal for about 3 or 4 years, but still used to hang here a lot - in fact I still link to T21 from my LJ. No, the problem is - as Jayjay mentioned earlier - people are lacking a common focus these days. With the demise of the Whedonverse shows and Nos nights, people have found other ways to get their Sci-fi on. While T21 is a general Sci-fi site, we can't forget that it came out of BuffyUK and that the original focus was Whedonverse.
However, while I have no objection to intelligent threads or even the dreaded political debate, posts here tend to be over-long, quasi-intellectual and frankly masturbatory. This is the Internet. Home of TL;DR and AOLer-speak. People don't have the patience to wade through opinionated, self-congratulatory posts to find actual debating points. These posts are exclusive and intimidating and when every sentence posted in reply is bolded and subject to patronising rebuttal it doesn't exactly encourage people to throw in their two cents. This site is not the university debating club and we're not all off to the SU bar afterwards for cider and black and a good laugh about it all. When people can't see your face, they have to rely on your words and when those are overblown and patronising you rarely win anyone's respect or friendship.
If posters were a little more concise and a little less self-important in their debates, it would go a long way.
(Edited by Kate 03/04/2006 08:43)
While I don't personally believe in a Deity as such, I wholeheartedly support people's right to believe what they choose.
On the "subtopic" of debates and T21, I think that while lively debate is healthy, what happens here is kinda not. Let me expand a little - people blame journals for the demise of the site and I think that's wrong. What people post on their journals is totally different to the sort of thing people used to post here. I've had a journal for about 3 or 4 years, but still used to hang here a lot - in fact I still link to T21 from my LJ. No, the problem is - as Jayjay mentioned earlier - people are lacking a common focus these days. With the demise of the Whedonverse shows and Nos nights, people have found other ways to get their Sci-fi on. While T21 is a general Sci-fi site, we can't forget that it came out of BuffyUK and that the original focus was Whedonverse.
However, while I have no objection to intelligent threads or even the dreaded political debate, posts here tend to be over-long, quasi-intellectual and frankly masturbatory. This is the Internet. Home of TL;DR and AOLer-speak. People don't have the patience to wade through opinionated, self-congratulatory posts to find actual debating points. These posts are exclusive and intimidating and when every sentence posted in reply is bolded and subject to patronising rebuttal it doesn't exactly encourage people to throw in their two cents. This site is not the university debating club and we're not all off to the SU bar afterwards for cider and black and a good laugh about it all. When people can't see your face, they have to rely on your words and when those are overblown and patronising you rarely win anyone's respect or friendship.
If posters were a little more concise and a little less self-important in their debates, it would go a long way.
(Edited by Kate 03/04/2006 08:43)
Posted: 08:39 Apr 03 2006 
Ooh didn't really take that aspect of the religious life into account earlier but yeah if you add to this the relatively small group (3% of the population) they become an easy "scapegoat" as they are clearly different yet PC doesn't really apply to them as a group
by Kate
Therefore if you don't go to church and don't participate it could appear as though you are separated from the community as a whole.
I wonder how much of this also has to do with PC as if I say I blame everything on for example a larger group of people that are clearly "different" from "me", like for example the muslim population of America I would be seen as "a racist". Aslong as you don't enjoy walking around in your mums white table cloth I guess you wouldn't really wanted to be branded as one. Does PC strike again? ..... The plot thickens 
Just to hook into whole subtopic. I personally believe it is a complex mix of many factors. Sure the debate on site hasn't been to everyones taste and with the demise of the Whendonverse shows etc we lost a common base. On BuffyUK general chat used to be the most popular forum which allowed people to chat about other things but with a group of people that like at least some of the same things. Without the common base more "groups" got created of people that in some way shape or form are attracted to each other. With the advent of the journals many of these groups were given the infrastructure to group together and enjoy more freedom than they would enjoy on public forum like GC (in sense of language used / topics that are acceptable etc). This meant that GC became obsolete in a sense as it doesn't give you the freedom you enjoy elsewhere and you don't get a the atmopshere you would like it doesn't make for a very appealing mix
Thats why I think many people "moved" on from T21.[Edited to make viewpoints a little bit clearer]
(Edited by Chambler 03/04/2006 14:27)
Posted: 09:42 Apr 03 2006
Not going to bother with the religion part of the thread because to my eyes it’s old and tired and suffers from the more important thing that Kate highlights below.
So basically to put my vote behind what others have said.
Certain staff members were left unchecked for too long, and it killed the site. Some staff left and none of the other staff seemed bothered to step into their shoes.
And I NEVER understood why certain staff members were ever allowed to continue being staff, and why certain members, to this day, aren’t.
Hell I object to the ‘debate’, Byron once talked about “winning†and I chuckled in a puzzled sort of way. I thought we came to discuss, not verbally hammer each other into the ground, but hey…
by Kate
However, while I have no objection to intelligent threads or even the dreaded political debate,
Couldn’t agree more, I often wondered if certain members sit with a thesaurus in their lap to embellish their posts thinking they’ll score points or, if they converse like that in real life?
by Kate
… posts here tend to be over-long, quasi-intellectual and frankly masturbatory.
They are intimidating, hard to follow and blatantly off putting. To the point where it’s not worth spending my five minutes of spare time posting on the site anymore, and so many previously prolific posters feel exactly the same
by Kate
People don't have the patience to wade through opinionated, self-congratulatory posts to find actual debating points. These posts are exclusive and intimidating and when every sentence posted in reply is bolded and subject to patronising rebuttal it doesn't exactly encourage people to throw in their two cents. This site is not the university debating club and we're not all off to the SU bar afterwards for cider and black and a good laugh about it all. When people can't see your face, they have to rely on your words and when those are overblown and patronising you rarely win anyone's respect or friendship.
If posters were a little more concise and a little less self-important in their debates, it would go a long way.
So basically to put my vote behind what others have said.
Certain staff members were left unchecked for too long, and it killed the site. Some staff left and none of the other staff seemed bothered to step into their shoes.
And I NEVER understood why certain staff members were ever allowed to continue being staff, and why certain members, to this day, aren’t.
Posted: 20:42 Apr 03 2006 
I kicked off the thread with a short post containing three quick paragraphs: first one summarising what I thought were the main points in the article; second taking the mick out of calling atheists selfish shopaholics; and third my response to the issue in general. No.3 consisted of two sentences. Can't get more concise than that. Follow-ups styled likewise.
Originally posted by Kate:
However, while I have no objection to intelligent threads or even the dreaded political debate, posts here tend to be over-long, quasi-intellectual and frankly masturbatory. This is the Internet. Home of TL;DR and AOLer-speak. People don't have the patience to wade through opinionated, self-congratulatory posts to find actual debating points. These posts are exclusive and intimidating and when every sentence posted in reply is bolded and subject to patronising rebuttal it doesn't exactly encourage people to throw in their two cents. This site is not the university debating club and we're not all off to the SU bar afterwards for cider and black and a good laugh about it all. When people can't see your face, they have to rely on your words and when those are overblown and patronising you rarely win anyone's respect or friendship.
If posters were a little more concise and a little less self-important in their debates, it would go a long way.
The quotes are simply in bold to distinguish them from the main text. No alterior motive. Suggesting flaws in the opposite argument isn't being patronising, it's trying to move the debate on. I don't look down on anyone for expressing their point of view. Resorting to insults is a different matter.
Posted: 01:21 Apr 06 2006
by MonSTeR
Hell I object to the ‘debate’, Byron once talked about “winning†and I chuckled in a puzzled sort of way. I thought we came to discuss, not verbally hammer each other into the ground, but hey…
Except I only mentioned winning to say it hardly ever happened and wasn't my aim! Already said perfectly clearly why I'm not hammering anyone into the ground; that charge is better aimed at chucking about playground insults.
Couldn’t agree more, I often wondered if certain members sit with a thesaurus in their lap to embellish their posts thinking they’ll score points or, if they converse like that in real life?
I'll settle the speculation for you right now. I don't own a thesaurus, never have, and have no intention of starting. Any points I want to score I'll do with debate, not clocking up syllables. The issues are complicated, not the way I describe them: but then there's not much I can do about inverse snobbery.
They are intimidating, hard to follow and blatantly off putting. To the point where it’s not worth spending my five minutes of spare time posting on the site anymore, and so many previously prolific posters feel exactly the same
So basically to put my vote behind what others have said.
Wouldn't be an issue if there were alternative non-"intimidating" topics, and if some members put a tenth of the effort they expend disrupting my threads into creating ones of their own, there soon would be.
Any issues you have about who we have as staff can be emailed to the admins.
Certain staff members were left unchecked for too long, and it killed the site. Some staff left and none of the other staff seemed bothered to step into their shoes.
And I NEVER understood why certain staff members were ever allowed to continue being staff, and why certain members, to this day, aren’t.
Posted: 01:42 Apr 06 2006 You can get them on the interwebby thing these days you know
by Byron
I'll settle the speculation for you right now. I don't own a thesaurus, never have, and have no intention of starting. Any points I want to score I'll do with debate, not clocking up syllables. The issues are complicated, not the way I describe them: but then there's not much I can do about inverse snobbery.
Posted: 18:56 Apr 06 2006 "Hey Marge, you know they got the internet on computers these days?!"
by JtB
(quotes)
You can get them on the interwebby thing these days you know
Posted: 20:05 Apr 06 2006 Nice to know. Anyone else care to comment?
by Byron
I'll settle the speculation for you right now. I don't own a thesaurus, never have, and have no intention of starting.
Some may disagree, but then that’s ok isn’t it?
by Byron
The issues are complicated, not the way I describe them:
If most of the members hadn’t already left (for whatever reason) then there may have been some non-“intimidating†threads. But they have, and there aren’t. And it seems there’s nothing anyone can do about it. Maybe T21 has passed the event horizon?
by Byron
Wouldn't be an issue if there were alternative non-"intimidating" topics, and if some members put a tenth of the effort they expend disrupting my threads into creating ones of their own, there soon would be.
However when you run a non self-perpetuating website it’s the job of the admin and the moderators to stimulate interest. Don’t get me wrong, there have been times when I’ve loved reading the long, complicated and interesting threads that you started, at times I’d even participate in them. However, just as you mention, no-one is doing the same to propagate the non-â€intimidating†threads. Perhaps the staffneed to nurture the site as a whole a bit more? Maybe (and I mean just maybe) there is still a glow to the embers that could relight?. I don’t think it’s likely and further more, I don’t see anyone here who a) cares enough about the site and b) has been allowed to assume a position to accomplish this.
Thank you for that handy hint.
by Byron
Any issues you have about who we have as staff can be emailed to the admins.
Posted: 22:17 Apr 06 2006 Probably
by KaTiEStar
Am i the only person in the world who doesnt think this site is dead?
Posted: 23:05 Apr 06 2006 Back in the mists BuffyUK there was far more current affairs yapping than now, but the regular hacks -- Dan, Inc, Mr Bob, Demona, CC, EightAce (bloody hell, now I am going back) -- also posted many witty, entertaining episode reviews & mythology gubbins.
by Monster
Maybe (and I mean just maybe) there is still a glow to the embers that could relight?. I don’t think it’s likely and further more, I don’t see anyone here who a) cares enough about the site and b) has been allowed to assume a position to accomplish this.
Yep, the dreaded politics crowd, given space, also contributed some of the best fun threads.
These days the whole site's become an intolerant battleground where going against the self-appointed majority is verboten. And that ain’t confined to politics. Back in the day there was friendly banter when people disagreed about shows; now merely criticising the Lost pilot gets you torn a new blowhole. Personally I said sod that and discussed it elsewhere, and I know for a fact similar incidents made other posters do the same. If you can visit another site & chat to your heart's content, or stay here and get hassle from people lacking the wit & decency to disagree without spitting insults, you've not got a difficult choice. Is it any wonder we've lost so many members?
Sure staff could, and probably should, do things differently, but we're already posting up plenty of fun threads & episode talk and no one's biting. Maff's posting up as many film threads as ever, but the film forum's dead. And we seem incapable of discussing what's wrong without muckslinging.
Unless we start treating each other with mutual respect again & have some positive & inclusive discussion on how to revive T21, this place is going to keep sinking faster than Mr Cameron's Oscar ticket.
Posted: 06:15 Apr 07 2006 I remember the departure of some of these members and have heard their reasons for leaving direct from the horses mouth (so to speak) Interestingly it wasn't anything to do with being attacked in threads. (and wasn't Mr Bob booted off the site for inappropriate behavior towards other members?) Even politics threads were fun those days because there wasn't a feeling that you were being looked down on for not understanding a particular point of view or only being able to contribute on a grass roots/ to or three line post level.
by Byron
Back in the mists BuffyUK there was far more current affairs yapping than now, but the regular hacks -- Dan, Inc, Mr Bob, Demona, CC, EightAce (bloody hell, now I am going back) -- also posted many witty, entertaining episode reviews & mythology gubbins.
verboten.
I don't know what that means
That I particularly disagree with. Most of the posts in this thread that have involved discussing whats wrong with this site have been polite and attempted to be constructive. Monstor in paricular has made some very interesting points on this and the feeling I'm getting from replies to his ideas is that they are being largely ignored. I appreciate that there is probably something going on behind the scenes in the staff forum, but you need to make the members who are here feel that their imput is valued. In my opinion it is the staff who need to be inclusive and not just with members but amongst themselves as well.
And we seem incapable of discussing what's wrong without muckslinging.
Posted: 14:27 Apr 07 2006
by Sydney
I remember the departure of some of these members and have heard their reasons for leaving direct from the horses mouth (so to speak) Interestingly it wasn't anything to do with being attacked in threads.
Well there we go, I've heard it played no small part, also from the horse's mouth. And if you reckon it's just me, check out JayJay's post earlier in the thread.
"The counter-argument: … those of us interested in debates like these have been made to feel very unwelcome over the years by other members - by people who outside of threads like this I would call friends. We've been attacked for being boring (sorry Milky, you're a mate an all, but that post was unnecessary and offensive), for the way we use the English language, and for wanting to debate."
(and wasn't Mr Bob booted off the site for inappropriate behavior towards other members?)
No, he wasn't. Don't know where you got that idea from.
Even politics threads were fun those days because there wasn't a feeling that you were being looked down on for not understanding a particular point of view or only being able to contribute on a grass roots/ to or three line post level.
I can't blame people for feeling that way, even though it was never intended. I can blame them for how it's expressed.
I don't know what that means.
Forbidden. And only used it cos if a word's used in newspaper headlines, seems fair enough to treat it as common currency.
That I particularly disagree with. Most of the posts in this thread that have involved discussing whats wrong with this site have been polite and attempted to be constructive.
Oh come off it! The criticism kicked off with "WooHoo...and I thought I might have trouble sleeping tonight till I found this
" from Milky, "I think Byron is a nob" from Yvonne, followed by "I would say the majority of staff on here now are condescending and talk out of their ass" from Whist and then finished up with "I hate to say I consider some of the staff to be bloody pillocks (please don't take offence its just my opinion" courtesy of Spike (who then complained about ... offensive opinions), and the only reason it didn't carry on like that is cos admin stepped in. Except it did, there was another post that was so bad it had to be removed entirely. (Not by me.) I'm not bracketing Kate with them, but "However … posts here tend to be over-long, quasi-intellectual and frankly masturbatory … when [your words] are overblown and patronising you rarely win anyone's respect or friendship" doesn't make the person posting those words feel overly welcome.
The last thread about what's wrong with T21 had "Nowadays we're treated to left-wing socio-econimic rants
" (I'm a right-winger who hardly ever posts about economics) and "I don't want to come home [to] political drudgery" in the very first post. Hardly Chris Rock worthy putdowns, and if people feel like that, no one's stopping them saying so (minus the personal attacks) but polite and constructive it isn't.
No one's ignoring them (I replied at length), I disagreed with much of them, but that isn't the same thing, and you don't even know what other staff think yet. As for valuing input, for ages there was a sticky in General specifically asking members for content, sadly it eventually got taken down after it didn't get any offers. Of course positive input is valued. Input of the kind I quoted above isn't. If members were posting the fun posts they say they're missing instead of insulting other members, their input would be valued highly.
Monstor in paricular has made some very interesting points on this and the feeling I'm getting from replies to his ideas is that they are being largely ignored. I appreciate that there is probably something going on behind the scenes in the staff forum, but you need to make the members who are here feel that their imput is valued. In my opinion it is the staff who need to be inclusive and not just with members but amongst themselves as well.
As for being inclusive, in this thread I haven't once insulted another member and have said I'm willing to meet people halfway. Those who felt so strongly about this they felt justified posting abuse haven't returned since they were told personal attacks are out. Makes me wonder if that's all they've got.
Posted: 17:19 Apr 07 2006 
Right I think this thread has managed to make clear what people think
a) about religion
b) about the site
c) about the nature of discussion
d) about specific people
Issues are noted and will be addressed.
I really dont think any more posts will accomplish anything. Not closing it but suggest that we please leave it here unless youve got something really new to add.
(Edited by Wobag 07/04/2006 21:51)
a) about religion
b) about the site
c) about the nature of discussion
d) about specific people
Issues are noted and will be addressed.
I really dont think any more posts will accomplish anything. Not closing it but suggest that we please leave it here unless youve got something really new to add.
(Edited by Wobag 07/04/2006 21:51)
Posted: 18:54 Apr 07 2006 Since thats aimed at me I think I should respond.
by Byron
As for being inclusive, in this thread I haven't once insulted another member and have said I'm willing to meet people halfway. Those who felt so strongly about this they felt justified posting abuse haven't returned since they were told personal attacks are out. Makes me wonder if that's all they've got.
1) Is that all I've got? No. But frankly I've tried the sensible, mature, approach with ideas aplenty only to watch absolutley no action taken by the people who can change this place. It gets to the point where you just have to give in and watch the ship go down.
2) My first comment was intended as some light-hearted fun poking. Yes I later posted an abusive post aimed at you. Yes this post was extremley inflammatory and abusive and deserved to be pulled. The reasons behind that post were a) that I was absolutley infuriated at how you never seem to take anyone elses opinion on board and b) to try and get yourself and admins to "wake up and smell the coffee".
This place is dead. It desperatley needs fresh members to inject a spark of life back into it. But I suppose it comes down to what kind of site this is and how people see it. I want a site thats fun, where people talk about everything from there current fave tv show through to *gasp, shock* the current political climate. However the way that these posts are currently done is exactly as Kate described earlier "over-long, quasi-intellectual and frankly masturbatory". On a site where you struggle to maintain the interest of the current membership how the hell do you attract new ones. Especially when they see threads like this. I've given plenty of ideas to members of staff on how to get more traffic here but they seem to have fallen on deaf ears *shrug* Now I don't see the point anymore. If T21 turns into your personal webspace for political soap-boxing then have fun with it. Me, I'll sit back and watch it burn.
Hopefully you'll prove me wrong though
Posted: 18:56 Apr 07 2006 I think this thread is just starting to get to the points that need to be made. As long as folks don’t get nasty which by and large we’ve managed so far. I think there’re lots of really new things that could be said and the devil has always been in the detail.
by Wobag
Right I think this thread has managed to make clear what people think
I really dont think any more posts will accomplish anything. Not closing it but suggest that we leave it here unless youve got something really new to add.
There were many, many more threads altogether, I’m not sure if anyone has retained full BuffyUK logs and we can perform a statistical analysis of the threads by content, but I’d wager the mix was probably not dissimilar. The fact that there were so many threads overall, with so many different members contributing gave everyone room to manoeuvre.
by Byron
Back in the mists BuffyUK there was far more current affairs yapping than now, but the regular hacks -- Dan, Inc, Mr Bob, Demona, CC, EightAce (bloody hell, now I am going back) -- also posted many witty, entertaining episode reviews & mythology gubbins.
But they were never a “dreaded politics crowdâ€, you might have liked them to be, I don’t know, but they were just members! And yes, all of those members yourself included put up some of the most interesting posts on the site in each of the subfora.
by Byron
Yep, the dreaded politics crowd, given space, also contributed some of the best fun threads.
What’s “Lost�
by Byron
These days the whole site's become an intolerant battleground where going against the self-appointed majority is verboten. And that ain’t confined to politics. Back in the day there was friendly banter when people disagreed about shows; now merely criticising the Lost pilot gets you torn a new blowhole. Personally I said sod that and discussed it elsewhere, and I know for a fact similar incidents made other posters do the same. If you can visit another site & chat to your heart's content, or stay here and get hassle from people lacking the wit & decency to disagree without spitting insults, you've not got a difficult choice. Is it any wonder we've lost so many members?
But what you’ve said here is true, folks have left, as much from your attitude as from mine or Yvonne’s or Milky’s. For the most part I think most people, not just you, post elsewhere what 5 or 6 years ago they’d have posted on BUK.
Most of the time my impression of you is that you are the one who lacks wit or decency and is dishing out the hassle, the feeling is more than likely mutual. That’s the problem, you’re asking people to behave in a certain way when most of them may perceive you as the antithesis of that model.
And being as blunt as I can be and I don’t mean to offend
But when the problem is the staff member, the normal members don’t feel they have a leg to stand on so they leave
So don’t shoot them down like you have been doing.like this one about the Da Vinci Code...
by Byron
Sure staff could, and probably should, do things differently, but we're already posting up plenty of fun threads & episode talk and no one's biting. Maff's posting up as many film threads as ever, but the film forum's dead. And we seem incapable of discussing what's wrong without muckslinging.
Not “I really didn’t like the book†or “ Am I the only person in the world that thought the book was over-rated?†Y’know things that prompt a reply and may even have encouraged discussion. Therein lies the difference between staff member and member As one of the “ dreaded politics crowd†it’s a great post, coming from a staff member, frankly it sucks.
by Byron
Well the novel's convoluted po-faced tosh,
One of the reasons I quit as a staff member was because I’d had enough of compromising my posting style doing my best to be a nice staff member. Seemingly you never bothered to do that, which is your own choice and I respect that, but that probably has never worked in the interests of the site as a whole. Maybe you should take a 6 month break from being a staff member, see if you enjoy the extra liberty of posting style that it brings?
If you don’t notice the difference, maybe you’ve never been doing the staff thing right all along? This is verging on a personal attack, I don’t want it to, it IS personal criticism and constructive criticism I hope, but I’ll move on from that point onto…
The more important point which is… if Maff is posting up all these film threads, why isn’t he on the staff? George organised the only site party for ages, only the site didn’t seem to recognise it as such, it didn’t beg to have him call it the T-party like it maybe should have, no it was decided that one might be organised later. These actions are what makes the site a community and they’re not being recognised in the eyes of the site as a whle. No wonder the membership is fragmenting/has fragmented. A change of staff might be the best thing that could happen?
OI !!! STAFF PEOPLE READ THIS NOW!!!
Ask yourself if you contribute to the site as a staff member in a way that you couldn’t contribute as a normal member. I think Whistler would agree with me that neither of us had anything more to offer as staff. We did the right thing when we realised that. Tam went when she didn’t have the time to spare. Ask yourselves, are you hanging on to your pretty little badge because it looks cool, or because you are an active, positive, contributing member of the staff. If you’re not, hang it up, and make room for those who are in a position to do the good you used to.
by Byron
Unless we start treating each other with mutual respect again & have some positive & inclusive discussion on how to revive T21, this place is going to keep sinking faster than Mr Cameron's Oscar ticket.
The key word here is mutual, I doubt that folks would fire off like they do if they thought they would get a decent level of respect first?
And what DID happen to Mr Cameron’s Oscar ticket I don’t get that
Posted: 21:17 Apr 07 2006 
thats usually my atitude...
by Sydney
I don't know what that means
Posted: 21:49 Apr 07 2006
Actually, the site did put in for the G Party.
This isnt a dig at anybody but its about time i had my say.
Im sick of the lot of you.
I have been around longer than nearly all of you. Before the site was even Buffyuk. And im still here.
I dont post as much as i did because times change and life events happen. The site doesnt have its huge buffy/angel following anymore because the shows have stopped so now its a social site.
Who doesnt log on to post on people birthday threads? Who doesnt check to see if theres a meet happening?
We wouldnt be having meets if it wasnt for this site in the first place.
Im sick to the back teeth of people that havent stuck it out thru the quiet patches having the bloody cheek to say that the site is dead.
No matter what the party's name was, me and G still got over 30 people to the party and it was all because of a common ground that is T21.
Just because im not posting doesnt mean i dont check the site about 15 times a day, i like to know people are still out there, and id put a bloody bet on it that theres more people out there watching than you think.
And who cares if theres only 3 people that ever post on the site again, the site would stay open for those 3 people, because thats what T21 is about.
Id like to say f*** off to those who dont have faith in the site, but that isnt my place. I just know that if it wasnt for T21 i woudlnt have some of my best friends in the world, and im sodding thankful for it.
And i dont care if ive rambled because its taken too much effort to not go on a swearing spree.
Edit: spelling crap before Yvonne kills me
(Edited by KaTiEStar 07/04/2006 22:04)
This isnt a dig at anybody but its about time i had my say.
Im sick of the lot of you.
I have been around longer than nearly all of you. Before the site was even Buffyuk. And im still here.
I dont post as much as i did because times change and life events happen. The site doesnt have its huge buffy/angel following anymore because the shows have stopped so now its a social site.
Who doesnt log on to post on people birthday threads? Who doesnt check to see if theres a meet happening?
We wouldnt be having meets if it wasnt for this site in the first place.
Im sick to the back teeth of people that havent stuck it out thru the quiet patches having the bloody cheek to say that the site is dead.
No matter what the party's name was, me and G still got over 30 people to the party and it was all because of a common ground that is T21.
Just because im not posting doesnt mean i dont check the site about 15 times a day, i like to know people are still out there, and id put a bloody bet on it that theres more people out there watching than you think.
And who cares if theres only 3 people that ever post on the site again, the site would stay open for those 3 people, because thats what T21 is about.
Id like to say f*** off to those who dont have faith in the site, but that isnt my place. I just know that if it wasnt for T21 i woudlnt have some of my best friends in the world, and im sodding thankful for it.
And i dont care if ive rambled because its taken too much effort to not go on a swearing spree.
Edit: spelling crap before Yvonne kills me
(Edited by KaTiEStar 07/04/2006 22:04)
Posted: 21:54 Apr 07 2006