Would you pay a tenner a year for NSC?

[Johners]

No problem, need the light relief at work some times.

 

[Safeway]

By the way Darren, I'll resist the temptation to say "If you can't run the site without it going down every two or three months then perhaps you should hand over to someone that can" because you being you you'll close it down immediately and put a message up blaming me.

Isn't it nice that we can discuss things like the adults that we are?

 

[CHAPPERS]

Safeways got the arse

 

[Dave the OAP]

No problem..tell me where to send my tenner

 

[JJ McClure]

Fine by me, I'd be bored otherwise.

 

[Highfields Seagull]

Yep, count me in.

 

[Safeway]

Safeways got the arse

f***ing right I've got the arse.

Bozza starts a poll asking people whether or not people would be willing to contribute financially to NSC. He goes out of his way to make the point that contributions will not be compulsory. Then, just because 100% of people don't back his, let's face it, half-arsed idea he decides to name people that have voted no. What the f***'s all that about?

I'm afraid it's a classic case of Bozza throwing his toys out of the pram, AGAIN. He does it a lot, like when he didn't get a Bournemouth ticket and closed NSC down (WTF?). The thing is most people don't say anything because he's the hero that saved NSC and brings it to us. Apprantly that makes him immune from criticism. Does it bollocks.

NSC is not successful because of Bozza. It is successful because it's NSC. If anyone is to be put on a pedastal then it's Gary (Manx Seagull). He's the one that started NSC all those years ago. Bozza's just carrying on the brand. Any monkey could do the same.

*awaits over-the-top reply from hyper-sensitive Bozza, challenging me to do better*

 

[Bozza]

So much for an anonymous poll, eh Darren? Okay, so it's not compulsory, you'll just name and attempt to 'shame' those that don't contrubute? Good work fella, cracking PR.

Not sure where you read this poll was anonymous...

Anyway - how can I name and shame those who do not contribute - no-one has contributed. This poll was only to canvass opinion as to if people would contribute should it be needed. It's a big IF - I'm currently in discussions with our host to determine the best way forward and hope to retain the current set-up if at all possible.

Apologies for naming you - I didn't realise you would be embarrassed about your vote - you're not known for being shy with your views. As a 'heavy' NSC user I value your opinion and was merely interested as to why you felt you would not contribute. There is nothing more sinister at play than that.

You've known my feelings on this subject pretty much since the beginning of time. Well, at least since NSC started experiencing these problems. Which, as it happens, seems to coincide with when you took over at the helm.

That reads as being very snide - I'm sure it wasn't intended that way. You seem to have forgotten that I only 'took over at the helm' because NSC had been having problems for approximately 3 months. These problems, in the form of excessive bandwidth usage, cost Manxseagull many hundreds of pounds. Given this - in 'taking over', it would have been somewhat short-sighted of me to not keep a very close eye on NSC's bandwidth usage.

Not that I or any of the other fourteen people that have so far voted 'no' should have to explain ourselves to you, but if it really makes you feel any better then I will:

It's nothing against NSC but I don't pay for any of the other websites I use so why should I pay for this one? All websites are provided by people that wish to provide a service. Apart from the obvious genre (and The Argus), can you name one other website that charges?

I know several messageboards that I just happen to have passed through that would not exist if it were not for user contributions. In no instance is it a charge - non-contributors are free to use the site. But in each case, if it were not for the contributions of some users, who obviously value the messageboard, the site would not be there.

I'm not saying you should fork out hundreds of pounds out of your own pocket but there are plenty of other message boards on the net that manage to run themselves free of charge, I'd say at least one for every other club in the land, why should we have to pay for this one? Despite all the hype, I'm sure NSC is not the busiest message board in the world.

As before - no-one will have to pay. But to guarantee the long-term and unrestricted use of NSC - it may be that users who wish to do so can contribute to keeping it going. Those who do not value the site enough to want to make a contribution will still be as free to use it as they are today.

End of the day it's all very noble of everyone to say "yeah, I'll chip in a tenner" but that's not how it should be.

Happy now?

As for this naming business, I appreciate you've probably got your knickers in a twist over this latest balls-up, but that's just well out of order.

You seem to have a closer handle on what has happened here. Could you please clarify what the balls-up was and who did it...

 

[Easy 10]

*taking his seat, waiting for the huge scrap about to break out*

 

[Bozza]

f***ing right I've got the arse.

Bozza starts a poll asking people whether or not people would be willing to contribute financially to NSC. He goes out of his way to make the point that contributions will not be compulsory. Then, just because 100% of people don't back his, let's face it, half-arsed idea he decides to name people that have voted no. What the f***'s all that about?

I'm afraid it's a classic case of Bozza throwing his toys out of the pram, AGAIN. He does it a lot, like when he didn't get a Bournemouth ticket and closed NSC down (WTF?). The thing is most people don't say anything because he's the hero that saved NSC and brings it to us. Apprantly that makes him immune from criticism. Does it bollocks.

NSC is not successful because of Bozza. It is successful because it's NSC. If anyone is to be put on a pedastal then it's Gary (Manx Seagull). He's the one that started NSC all those years ago. Bozza's just carrying on the brand. Any monkey could do the same.

*awaits over-the-top reply from hyper-sensitive Bozza, challenging me to do better*

Nice.

The Bournemouth thing was a joke fella. Which was why NSC was down for about 10 minutes.

Like, how I was going to brand NSC as being a Reading site when Coppell went there - saying they had bought NSC as well. I had the image ready and everything...

We were going to have Coppell's Corner and the like. It would have been great. Joke. Get it?

 

[Turkey]

So much for an anonymous poll, eh Darren? Okay, so it's not compulsory, you'll just name and attempt to 'shame' those that don't contrubute? Good work fella, cracking PR.

You've known my feelings on this subject pretty much since the beginning of time. Well, at least since NSC started experiencing these problems. Which, as it happens, seems to coincide with when you took over at the helm.

Not that I or any of the other fourteen people that have so far voted 'no' should have to explain ourselves to you, but if it really makes you feel any better then I will:

It's nothing against NSC but I don't pay for any of the other websites I use so why should I pay for this one? All websites are provided by people that wish to provide a service. Apart from the obvious genre (and The Argus), can you name one other website that charges?

I'm not saying you should fork out hundreds of pounds out of your own pocket but there are plenty of other message boards on the net that manage to run themselves free of charge, I'd say at least one for every other club in the land, why should we have to pay for this one? Despite all the hype, I'm sure NSC is not the busiest message board in the world.

End of the day it's all very noble of everyone to say "yeah, I'll chip in a tenner" but that's not how it should be.

Happy now?

As for this naming business, I appreciate you've probably got your knickers in a twist over this latest balls-up, but that's just well out of order.

Since when was the poll anonymous? No one ever said that it was. As for blaming Darren for the problems? Come off it. He took over when ManxSeagull unfortuantly mismanaged NSC (I presume) to find himself with a huge bill. www.footiethreads.com is asking for donations. So NSC isn't the only site and I footiethreads doesn't even have its own server (I think!).

 

[Theatre of Trees]

I'll throw a tenner into the hat.

 

[The Large One]

I would happily arrange a quiz night / karaoke night with the proceeds going to the running costs of NSC. I would like to think that the quiz on Feb 6 for the 40 Notes would pull in about £600. I could easily do that for NSC.

Perhaps we could have a bucket at the next NSC meet up?

So many ways of raising the dosh...

 

[CHAPPERS]

Nice.

The Bournemouth thing was a joke fella. Which was why NSC was down for about 10 minutes.

Like, how I was going to brand NSC as being a Reading site when Coppell went there - saying they had bought NSC as well. I had the image ready and everything...

We were going to have Coppell's Corner and the like. It would have been great. Joke. Get it?

Now that WOULD have been funny.

 

[Marc]

Yes I would be willin to pay £10 per year.

 

[pasty]

Yes I would.

Can you offer me terms of 19½p a week ?

 

[Yorkie]

By the way Darren, I'll resist the temptation to say "If you can't run the site without it going down every two or three months then perhaps you should hand over to someone that can"

Safeway, you're starting to sound like FG (joke tongue in cheek )

Where are all these people queuing up to take over NSC?

 

[Padders]

How do you want the money?

 

[Bozza]

Time this became a poll only, methinks.

Edit: but not sure I can now...

 

[Safeway]

Not sure where you read this poll was anonymous...

If that's the case then why bother with a poll at all? Simply ask people to post their thoughts and everything's out in the open. You're right, I'm not ashamed of my stance. My first post in this thread was asking if the banner ad option had been exhausted and left it that. I deliberately didn't spill my guts on the subject because it would have reopened the can of worms that has been done so many times before with the same result (us two barneying). However I'm not going to sit by when you attempt to single me out.

I know several messageboards..................non-contributors are free to use the site. But in each case, if it were not for the contributions of some users, who obviously value the messageboard, the site would not be there.

As before - no-one will have to pay. But to guarantee the long-term and unrestricted use of NSC - it may be that users who wish to do so can contribute to keeping it going. Those who do not value the site enough to want to make a contribution will still be as free to use it as they are today.

You see, it's your tone. "some users, who obviously value the messageboard" - By making comments like that and "Those who do not value the site enough to want to make a contribution" you're attempting to draw a line between those who 'value' NSC and those that apparently do not. It's like someone saying "yeah, well I drive 250 miles to Albion home games because I've got nothing better to, therefore I must be a better fan than you." Perhaps that's not your intention, but that's how it's coming across to me at least.

Turkey, do you mind? I'm talking to the organ grinder, not the monkey. Haven't you got some post counts to f*** up or something?

And Yorkie, I'm not sure how you arrive at your 'FG' conclusion but I can assure you that's not the case. FG is a spastic that contantly spouts the same, monotanous bullshit for the sake of it, without foundation or reason. This is not Bozza-bashing for the sake of it, it's an arguement which, at the risk of starting like a school kid, he started after trying to humiliate me.