What's Llandudno Like Right Now?

[DaveR]

We occasionally get the odd person on the Forum who pops up and says he doesn't like this or that. My comment to them is always the same..."if you don't like it, don't read it".

[Nemesis]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hatch,_Beatrice_(Lewis_Carroll,_30.07.1873).jpg

Not sure Llandudno should be that keen on the Carroll/Dodgson and Alice connections really. Might just come back to haunt us.

I feel trouble ahead, having read what some of Oscar's followers have to say.

[DaveR]

I don't really see the point of the name change, to be honest. It will still remain 'Bog Island' to all the locals anyway. Trying to create more of an Alice theme when there's nothing tangible really left (i.e. Penmorfa) will have limited success, I feel.

[Fester]

Reminds me of the excited tourists I was chatting to the other day.

Clutching handbooks, they were asking for directions to the Story Tellers Chair, Happy Valley, etc.... and the pinnacle of their visit, the Pen Morfa 'Alice' house....   

If those in authority could do nothing to preserve that excellent building, then why should they be able to elicit any kind of success from some half-arsed 're-naming' venture?

The horse long since left the stable.

[Nemesis]

Agreed Fester---Horse Gate and Bolted comes to mind.

If people do find the Penmorfa site it looks more like a builder's yard-- which it seems to be.

[born2run]

We occasionally get the odd person on the Forum who pops up and says he doesn't like this or that. My comment to them is always the same..."if you don't like it, don't read it".

A better comment is "If you don't like it challenge it"

But it seems if anybody, like Kowalski, dares to swim against the tide on here they get completely trashed and they themselves (not just their opinions) are normally labelled somewhere along the following "Pathetic" "Attention seeking" "Just out to get a reaction" etc etc

Surely you can be sensible enough to accept that if someone has a different opinion to you it doesn't necessarily mean they are just out to cause trouble! It may just mean they have a different opinion to you I don't understand why that is so difficult for some of the forum mafia to accept!

I like it when opinions clash, and I know Fester does as well. I'd much rather read an interesting debate than 9 pages about trees or gardens or whatever. It's a shame that almost as soon as anyone interesting pops up they are driven away with a bombardment of often unnaceptable vitriol

[born2run]

Kowalski has thrown his toys out the pram!

http://llandudnojetset.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/our-old-name-no-longer-reflects-our-thinking/

[DaveR]

Kowalski has thrown his toys out the pram!

http://llandudnojetset.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/our-old-name-no-longer-reflects-our-thinking/

It's interesting how he refers to himself in the plural, isn't it. Why do you imagine he does that?

[DaveR]

We occasionally get the odd person on the Forum who pops up and says he doesn't like this or that. My comment to them is always the same..."if you don't like it, don't read it".

A better comment is "If you don't like it challenge it"

But it seems if anybody, like Kowalski, dares to swim against the tide on here they get completely trashed and they themselves (not just their opinions) are normally labelled somewhere along the following "Pathetic" "Attention seeking" "Just out to get a reaction" etc etc

Surely you can be sensible enough to accept that if someone has a different opinion to you it doesn't necessarily mean they are just out to cause trouble! It may just mean they have a different opinion to you I don't understand why that is so difficult for some of the forum mafia to accept!

I like it when opinions clash, and I know Fester does as well. I'd much rather read an interesting debate than 9 pages about trees or gardens or whatever. It's a shame that almost as soon as anyone interesting pops up they are driven away with a bombardment of often unnaceptable vitriol

To be fair, and as you well know, we've had plenty of interesting debates on here that haven't turned remotely nasty. And the thing is this....the content of Forum is directly down to the Members. What you might refer to as a 'forum mafia' are, in fact, those members that can be bothered to contribute. There's nothing to stop you or anyone else contributing a bit more to even out the balance is there?

With regards to Kowalski, the classic example was where he roundly condemned the Forum members for failing to speak out against the proposed EDL Rally, even though he himself had not bothered to comment on the issue at the time it was raised!

I also can't see how referring to Forum members as 'a clique whose spite and petty-mindedness have caused me to doubt my feelings about my hometown' can be construed as anything other than a personal attack on the rest of us either?

[wrex]

Not sure what the hell all the fuss is about and the only plass that flag appears at is Bangor City games,don;t think Llandudno fc get much support from anybody in this town,shall i drop the Llandudno out of the Extravaganza and call it the North Wales extravaganza,sometimes i can;t work out my fellow towners.

[Tosh]

We occasionally get the odd person on the Forum who pops up and says he doesn't like this or that. My comment to them is always the same..."if you don't like it, don't read it".

A better comment is "If you don't like it challenge it"

But it seems if anybody, like Kowalski, dares to swim against the tide on here they get completely trashed and they themselves (not just their opinions) are normally labelled somewhere along the following "Pathetic" "Attention seeking" "Just out to get a reaction" etc etc

Surely you can be sensible enough to accept that if someone has a different opinion to you it doesn't necessarily mean they are just out to cause trouble! It may just mean they have a different opinion to you I don't understand why that is so difficult for some of the forum mafia to accept!

I like it when opinions clash, and I know Fester does as well. I'd much rather read an interesting debate than 9 pages about trees or gardens or whatever. It's a shame that almost as soon as anyone interesting pops up they are driven away with a bombardment of often unnaceptable vitriol

To be fair, and as you well know, we've had plenty of interesting debates on here that haven't turned remotely nasty. And the thing is this....the content of Forum is directly down to the Members. What you might refer to as a 'forum mafia' are, in fact, those members that can be bothered to contribute. There's nothing to stop you or anyone else contributing a bit more to even out the balance is there?

With regards to Kowalski, the classic example was where he roundly condemned the Forum members for failing to speak out against the proposed EDL Rally, even though he himself had not bothered to comment on the issue at the time it was raised!

I also can't see how referring to Forum members as 'a clique whose spite and petty-mindedness have caused me to doubt my feelings about my hometown' can be construed as anything other than a personal attack on the rest of us either?

Hear hear Dave.
Some of us keep our fingers on the pulse and I think that the majority try to play fair.
You can please some of the people etc.
 

[Ian]

But it seems if anybody, like Kowalski, dares to swim against the tide on here they get completely trashed and they themselves (not just their opinions) are normally labelled somewhere along the following "Pathetic" "Attention seeking" "Just out to get a reaction" etc etc

This is fairly common in any society, though, and is particularly strong in 'fraternal' organisations such as Trades Unions. As Dave says, however, the members themselves determine the cultural content of this site, and Dave and I actually have significantly different views on many things so the Admin side of things is reasonably balanced, I think. The massive problem with any forum is that the written word is devoid of any of the associated clues on which language depends. For instance, it can be perfectly okay to tell someone to "B***er Off" in a friendly way, but that comes over very differently when there are no clues, such as intonation, inflexion or any of the hundreds of minute expressions we all use, mostly without realising.  We also have to accept that folk with various conditions, such as Asperger's or Tourettes, might well become members. From the Gt Ormond St hospital:

This might mean that difficulties with social interaction can include not understanding the subtleties of social situations, recognising and interpreting other people’s feelings, managing emotions or making and maintaining friendships.

Difficulties with social communication tend to encompass problems with using and understanding verbal and non verbal language, such as modulating tone of voice and gestures.

We're all somewhere on the Autism scale: it can be interesting to see how you fare

[hollins]

I like it when opinions clash, and I know Fester does as well. I'd much rather read an interesting debate than 9 pages about trees or gardens or whatever.

Surely we all have a choice of what to read from the list of topics? I would never bother clicking on the politics thread because that doesn't interest me. We are all different and that is a good thing but I would never belittle anyone for having a different interest.
Like DaveR says it would be great if more people would contribute in whatever way because that would give the forum more variety.

[Fester]

We also have to accept that folk with various conditions, such as  Tourettes, might well become members.

I would just LOVE IT if that were to ever happen.

You would have to disable the word-filter thingy, to allow swear words, or you may be accused of discrimination!

Then.... it would be hilarious!   

[DaveR]

Surely Tourettes is a spoken affliction, rather than written?! Anyway, anyone who's ever had a conversation with Fester would not find a Tourette's sufferer worrying at all.