Does this website serve any function whatsoever?

  • 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!

Do you think this site:

  • serves no function whatsoever?

  • would be better if Skates were banned?

  • is highly irritating?

  • serves only to misinform fans?

Results are only viewable after voting.
A little surprised by the poll options. It's a bit like when
my son was first at the age to choose a team. My poll then was a; saints b; saints reserves c; saints youth d; I don't like football, so send me back in there to collect my missing gene.

I enjoy this site. It gives me some spiel with other saints fans. It has some good debate and some bad debate. Some posters annoy me, some engage me with good topics. Those that slag the site off, moan at other posters for same old stuff and are generally negative I just wonder about them.

Shame
 
Forums are discussion groups. If you want information go elsewhere. I would say that banning Pompey fans would leave nobody to laugh at but some Saints fans do appear to be pretty dumb too. However, intelligence (or lack of) should not a pre-requisite to debate. Even idiots can come up with something brilliant occasionally. In answer to the poll then, none of the answers reflect my view.
 
St Godders said:
Can someone quantify exactly what they have gained form visitng this site?
Click to expand...

Quantifying social interaction is best achieved through using forms of social network analysis. Assessing your usage of this forum, using a cost-benefit analysis of cost (your time invested on the forum, percentage usage cost of your internet subscription etc) against any benefit (money saved? - nothing I expect, free knowledge and debate, priceless entertainment value and so forth) - it's not a worthy exercise. Think you're being a little harsh godders, you telling me you haven't got a kick out of using this forum? For some of us the forum doesn't serve to be that informative of real news because we've already got our finger on the pulse elsewhere. However hearing other's views on the same matters is always interesting. Plus there's testing the water with controversial topics which I believe is your forte.

I voted no.2 - I share your hatred. But we wouldn't really want them removed, it's nice to have a constant reminder by having them on here of how much better off (in all respects) we are.
 
I dont know how to start these polls but if I did it would probably go a little like this...

Poll: Do you think St Godders:

  1. serves no function whatsoever?
  2. would be better if he were banned?
  3. is highly irritating?
  4. serves only to WUM Pompey fans?

This may be a bit insulting but then I'm sure the people who put alot of hard work in to supplying us this site and all the people who enjoy it found your poll insulting too.

But I guess we are back to the freedom of speech thing again aren't we? Maybe that's what function this site serves.
 
does the Mona Lisa serve any useful function? Does a sunset serve any useful fuction? does birdsong serve any useful function to humans? The answer is probably no, but the world would be a darker, sadder place without them! Move over Proust, my work here is done!
 
Actually St godders.........You have heard a few views.......it is strange that you should actually compose such a negative thread to ask peoples views yet you have not offered any yourself. Do you really have such a negative view of the site? If so how can it be improved?
 
Godders - some of us get alot from this forum - clearly you only want to read responses from people who agree with your obvious dissatisfaction - your signature clearly sets out for all to see you arrogant state of mind. Don't bother replying - you are on my ignore list - so move on with your life and feel self-important somewhere else.
 
Beddytare said:
Actually St godders.........You have heard a few views.......it is strange that you should actually compose such a negative thread to ask peoples views yet you have not offered any yourself. Do you really have such a negative view of the site? If so how can it be improved?
Click to expand...

Actually Beddytare I quite enjoy visiting this site and seeing what people have to say and to make the occasional contribution.

What prompted me to ask the question is that if you analyse the various threads they fall into a number of categories:

People telling us what we have already read on other websites;
Idle speculation on which players we will sell or buy;
People deliberately making up rumours or claiming to be in the know;
People moaning about players or how the club is run;
People who are impatient to find out when season tickets will be available/when the new strip will be out etc;
Clearly there are the WUMs and some would include me amongst those.

I just felt that if people reflected upon what the purpose of this site was then we might get contributions which would allow people to get more from it.

Unfortunately my intention was misinterpreted and the response was a barrel load of insults.

Please note that at no time have I criticised this site. I have just asked some probing questions which have been interpreted as criticism.

To turn the tables on you I have made contributions in the form of threads to keep the conversation going through the dark days of the close season but if you feel I am more of a hindrance than a benefit to this site then I will happily bugger off as they say as I have plenty of interests other than football to keep me amused.
 
Godders, seeing as since you signed up you have posted lots and lots of articles, I was kind of hoping you would be able to enlighten us as to why people post threads all the time?
 
A few years ago, a Tory politician who is now back in office, was forced to resign. His name is David Willetts. He was a very bright chap, and had the nickname "two brains" as a consequence. I can't remember exactly what he got caught up with, but his testimony to some enquiry found that he was guilt of dissembling.

This is not the first time that St Godders has posted in a manner to get a reaction and then provided a figleaf of justification, which I think amounts to dissembling. Frankly, it's not very convincing from the person who has made 265 posts on these boards, to ask what other people get out of it almost as if he is trying to work out why he has made all these posts himself.

I know what I get out of these boards, and it is not all about you, St G.
 
Ok St Godders, I read your really long reply to Beddytare (not a dig, just saving space by referring to it rather than quoting it) and there is validity there on what you write. Yet I have a couple of questions for you:

If you wanted an intellectual debate without the "barrage of insults", why did you only offer poll answers that were all negative towards the site?

Would you agree with hindsight that your original poll reads as "knocking" the site?

If you still want that debate, why don't you re-post the thread and poll with a list of answers that offer positive and negative about the site.

For the record, I like the site. I am fortunate to have a job that travels slot and gives me one of these fancy phone thingies that allows me to post regularly between appointments. I enjoy slot of the banter; I don't enjoy the personal slaggings or the attitude of those who "own" the site; I love the titbits (not Dandy's avatar) of rumour about saints, no matter how daft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back