not606 is just not 606

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I have to agree that in hindsight, the 3 minute rule did work better and I also miss Mitch and Bushey Arches - but I did always say that. Football forums need a wide input of views to keep them thriving and that is what I miss most.

We need a bit more bite to keep it fresh..
 
what a co-incidence

I've not logged in for ages - pressure of work - but thought I should tonight - interesting to see this thread up

anyway

1) I'm with Yorkshire @ 648pm - it's all the other stuff round the edges that slows it down for me
2) <redwine> please


COYH
 
There are things here that I ignore as they have no real connection to me. I probably write things that others choose to ignore, but that is their right. In some ways I think that people have been seduced by those little boxes on the left telling you that you don't have as many points as someone else, or that your activity level has dropped. When they start to become important the single ;) becomes an answer, which of course it isn't. Some of us, let us say of more mature years, did wonder about them at the beginning, but assumed that they were put there to attract younger members.

With regards to match threads, living away from an area where I can get to or listen to games except by Hornet player, I try to bring out comments from Jon Marks or whoever is with him about the game. I find that I am getting my commentary later than those listening to 3CR and choose to try and give a slightly different slant on what can be heard, as the basics are usually reported before I have received them.

We have some good posters on here and I would prefer the slightly staid thread if it means well thought out opinions rather than shoot from the hip reactions to a "lively" comment. I am happy to have both, but by nature I am hardly likely to start winding others up just to get the outrageous reply.
 
Leonardo said:
Dan - when the comments become "how are you hon, lol" etc then it appeals to some and not to others - for me facebook and twitter are not areas I wish to follow and those types of post are to me more fitting to those forums (fora ?? :) )

We had none of that "intimate" posting on 606 - I actually agree with the earlier comment that in hindsight the 3 minute rule did actually serve some purpose.

I don't have a solution though - just agreeing with some ohters that soehow this site appears to have lost some "edge" and "vitality" Only my opinion of course
Click to expand...

The comments like "how are you hon" are part of common courtesy and conversation. If there were other topics to discuss then they would be discussed. What other options do we have, to be cold and emotionless robots??
 
Part of the trouble might be that there aren't too many of us on here to give variation in views and debates?
 
Nearly 300 horns on here Mark , but a vast majority prefer to stay silent ,which is a big shame, Cmon guys and girls these forums only work with differing opinions and inputs! So please join in we dont bite and are a friendly bunch:)
 
I have also thought that something did seem a bit different, but I have not been around much and also just put it down to it being the off-season. It could be that this site suffers from its ability to be more democratic and responsive. Maybe it has tried to do too much and be all things to all people, and maybe this has taken it off slightly from its original purpose as an opinion board about Watford. That said, I actually like the threads that are 'off-topic' and on more current affairs.

As an idea for site development, could the threads be shown in either a split screen format so that you can see the most recently commented on thread as well as the most recently created thread. It is possible that old threads take over at the top simply from someone doing the sort of comment that Leo refers to do (personally I do not mind them as long as there are not a series which lost the thread of the discussion taking place). The benefit of my suggestion is that new threads do not get buried, and you still get to see where an old thread has been picked up by someone because say they have been away, or there has been a development.

The other suggestion I would make is if there could be folders which the threads are located in e.g. friend chat/banter; current affairs; football. That way it keeps it tidy and you can dip into which ever folder depending on your mood and what you are after. This may also prevent people having a quick glance and thinking it is all the same old discussion. Granted; it might not, but I do think it would help.

Anyway just some thoughts to add to the discussion. I do like the site, and I have a lot of time for the opinions which are expressed here. I can see what people mean about it lacking bite, but that is the price of having reasoned and articulate discussion, which is often what we have here. I think we did have threads with 'bite' over the Summer with Mackay and Bassini. Maybe we just need an incident for people to get a more bit fired up about.
 
Bradleysdad excellent post !Thank you and I love the folder idea! I think that could work well and give us the flexibility we are looking for !Would you mind if I pass that idea upstairs!!
Top idea!!! Cmon Guys this is the sort of stuff we are after , get your thinking hats on and post your ideas , What would you like to see here ? we have heard some views make yours known!
In anticipation thanks guys and gals:)
 
Bradleysdad said:
Cheers, Norway. To be fair I just took it as a given it would get passed on if people thought the idea had merit. So yes, please do.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if anything is suggested of any merit we pass it on. Mick is usually good and gets back to us on most. Some cant work unfortunately but he gives them all a good look.
 
Bradleysdad I always ask permission first to pass stuff on , dont know why, guess its polite <laugh> anyway done have have forwarded it upstairs!!
If you have anymore quality brainwaves please let us know!
 
For what its worth I think more football based topics will encourage more contributions. Being relatively new on this I don't really know what the nest is and the short news items are very random and there are sometimes important bits of news or interesting speculation in there if I can be bothered to trawl through. The debate about announcing a signing 20 minutes after it appeared as a comment on two other threads, elicited a response from someone that they didn't have time to go through all comments on threads on a mobile device to find what was going on - and that I think is a good point.

The first page after the stickies quite often have subjects hanging around which aren't anything to do with WFC or football in general while news and subjects for debate slip away.

I reckon if we have more (relevant) topics and more opinion pieces it will encourage more comments and more differing views from more users. The poll that went up today is a good move in this direction.

The WO site has gone to a ridiculous extreme but I think we lack something without the more opinionated users that used to be on the old 606 and despite being generally unhappy with much of what has happened at the club in the last couple of months I have tried to be a lot more balanced and reasonable in my posts than I was on the old site (aside from a few outbursts as we were getting battered by WHU) and that is down to this forum being much more mature, thoughtful and better informed than others.
 
Mitch's name has come up several times, but he had changed quite a lot just before he wandered off. I remember him saying that he had become a father, and after that he had other things on his mind.

Certainly though his playing around with different formations could produce a reaction.
 
I don't see anyone other than Norway and Dan who complain about the number of threads. On BBC we used to occasionally have two people see some news and post almost simulatneously. Usually one of the threads then got used. What difference does it make if there are more threads? We have the least number of threads per post of all the major clubs on here with a reasonable number of users.

Strangely I am able to look at what threads I am interested in and then read them and post or not as I please. I consider myself to be an average user so assume most others do the same. Trying to put everything in the Nest means you have to go through page upon page sometimes - especially when Norway, Hornette and Dan have one of their chatty nights. I really don't want to intrude on those sort of semi-private conversations which anyway are full of facebook/ twitter pictures; lols and hons.

Norway - you are incorrect - on BBC we had as many threads on the likes of Libya as we do here - that is not what is detracting from the Nest. I think some of us have simply got a bit less to say as we are fairly depressed by the football and we do not want to criticise Dyche or Watford but cannot summon up the energy to be overly happy clappers. I am sure when our points pick up the gloom will lessen
 
I have been using Not606 much less now the season has started. I now get my regular football fix from the football itself as opposed to the chat.

I feel there are certainly some negatives to this site. The main problem being lack of "inter-club-banter". I also feel the increased freedom and personalisation has had a negative effect. On 606 you were merely a name. Now we have our own "spaces", avatars, "about me" pages, photo albums. I have expressed these concerns in the past, when labelling all users as mentalists.

However, I am still a fan of Not606, and feel the positives out weigh the negatives. I come here first when searching for Watford FC news. In fact, Not606 is my current most viewed website (just ahead of the Nordin Wooter Official Fan Club and www.beardedlesbians.com).
 
I would also have to agree with Leonardo's stance (although be a little more democratic and refrain from labelling!)

I can certainly see how users from the "outside" could feel a little intimidated into posting, due to a certain level of cliquey-ness.

As for the "management" of our boards, I don't see a problem in the slightest. If there are multiple threads on similar subjects, who cares?! I say let people discuss what they want. I think it is a case of misplaced power. The moderating is around purely to "clean up", not create some sort of government.
 
All very interesting comments, yes i agree the layout is a bit clunky but i think its hard to solve that without a major renovation of the site. One suggestion from me would be to have the Watford page in order of when the articles were posted as opposed to anything else, like it was on 606 (now is that something for the bigwigs to change or can I customise it myself??)

The bite has been lost for a couple of reasons. The more controversial Hornets fans such as Bushey, Mitch and Gary seemed to have disappeared (two I wouldn't mind seeing back) , and also the inter-fan banter is no good. Partly because not everyone from 606 has come to not606, but also because it is trickier to post an article that covers two different clubs (on the old 606 you just had to do a match article that involved both teams). Is there of bringing that feature back?

On a final note, i think whatever we do its unrealistic to expect it to be as good as 606. There was something about it, the feasibility, the look, and the ability to connect to other fans of teams that simply makes it unrivaled in my opinion. This is decent, though I will probably start posting less soon with university round the corner.
 
I think that the season has only just started. In the off-season there was more time for non-football stuff. Banter is all well and good, but some of the other 606 sites were dreadful, full of yawny insults and barely understandable comments. I for one don't want to read that here.... I think that you can be selective. I can open the last page of, say the Nest or any other thread, see if the conversation is interesting and then go back to the start of the idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back