Suggestion‏

tomwakefield

tartantipster wrote: »

I agree, members will not decide, MSE will, but MSE will listen to opinion & logic before making a final decision.

They may do. But I don't think they'll change it based on a majority decision of GIOL members (if it happens to be the case).

tartantipster wrote: »

The reasons I give for change most certainly do not rely on "it would make it easier not having to wade through chat to find the offers". The OP and my thread replies are testimony to that.

Your OP states two reasons for the split - the first of which is

...meaning those not in need of, or wanting to avoid wading through pages of meaningless banter, could just get straight down to business.

which is exactly what I said.

Your second point in the OP

...whilst making it easier too for Newcomers / Beginners / Amateur Match-Bettors to source the information that they require

I think is adequately covered by the stickies.

jobbingmusician

tartantipster wrote: »

you are not failing anyone, you're a star, doing an often thankless job..............:beer:

heartily endorsed! :d

Edit: Now imagine the above typed in caps, which is the way I wrote it....

tartantipster

jobbingmusician wrote: »

heartily endorsed! :d

Edit: Now imagine the above typed in caps, which is the way I wrote it....

Deserved double boost for MK;)

rosepetal37

Not really read all of this apart from the first page, but if the "no tips just chat" thread was made more prominent somehow?

tartantipster

tomwakefield wrote: »

They may do. But I don't think they'll change it based on a majority decision of GIOL members (if it happens to be the case).

Your OP states two reasons for the split - the first of which is which is exactly what I said.

Your second point in the OP
I think is adequately covered by the stickies.

A) They may do. But I don't think they'll change it based on a majority decision of GIOL members (if it happens to be the case)

"...I agree, members will not decide, MSE will, but MSE will listen to opinion & logic before making a final decision..."

There is no mention of a majority decision here, instead I said they will give due consideration to members opinion & logic before making a final decision.

Your OP states two reasons for the split - the first of which is

i) Let's quote the whole thing shall we, rather than snippets, and then see how many we can truly count, whilst keeping it all in complete context.

tartantipster wrote: »

From: tartantipster
Sent: 14 September 2009 01:33:31
To: webmaster@moneysavingexpert.com
Cc: martin@moneysavingexpert.com

Dear Sir / Madam,

Username: tartantipster

Please could we have two Forums thus:

1. Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes
2. Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes - Chat

Forum No.1 (Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes) is cluttered and chocked with general chat. Please could you initiate a second Forum, No.2 titled Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes - Chat. This would ensure that there would only ever be, exclusively: Introductory Offers/Freebets/Reloads/Cashbacks/Promotions/Bonuses/Incentives/Competitions in Forum No.1 meaning those not in need of, or wanting to avoid wading through pages of meaningless banter, could just get straight down to business, whilst making it easier too for Newcomers / Beginners / Amateur Match-Bettors to source the information that they require. Forum Moderators will of course have to monitor this ensuring posts that truly belong in either thread do go there.

All round this will be a super time saver for us money saving experts!

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind Regards, tartantipster.


New thread started on this for feedback.

C)

tomwakefield wrote: »

It's not a decision which can be made by GIOL members. We can suggest something, sure, but I am of the impression that, unless we can come up with something better than "it would make it easier not having to wade through chat to find the offers" it'll be a non-starter.

I'm another one who is happy with the board as it is at the moment. I find it very convenient only having to look through the thread titles in one forum.

It's not exactly what I said is it, and don't forget:

tartantipster wrote: »

I agree, members will not decide, MSE will, but MSE will listen to opinion & logic before making a final decision.

The reasons I give for change most certainly do not rely on "it would make it easier not having to wade through chat to find the offers". The OP and my thread replies are testimony to that.

The entire thread needs to be gone through post by post, as I have done.

D) I think is adequately covered by the stickies.

It is no where near adequately covered, and my suggestion would outstrip the current set-up by a country mile. My concept is far superior, more uniform, and seemless.

:beer:

tomwakefield

tartantipster wrote: »

i) Let's quote the whole thing shall we, rather than snippets, and then see how many we can truly count, whilst keeping it all in complete context.

Originally Posted by tartantipster
From: tartantipster
Sent: 14 September 2009 01:33:31
To: [EMAIL="webmaster@moneysavingexpert.com"]webmaster@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL]
Cc: [EMAIL="martin@moneysavingexpert.com"]martin@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL]

Dear Sir / Madam,

Username: tartantipster

Please could we have two Forums thus:

1. Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes
2. Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes - Chat

Forum No.1 (Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes) is cluttered and chocked with general chat. Please could you initiate a second Forum, No.2 titled Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes - Chat. This would ensure that there would only ever be, exclusively: Introductory Offers/Freebets/Reloads/Cashbacks/Promotions/Bonuses/Incentives/Competitions in Forum No.1 meaning those not in need of, or wanting to avoid wading through pages of meaningless banter, could just get straight down to business, whilst making it easier too for Newcomers / Beginners / Amateur Match-Bettors to source the information that they require. Forum Moderators will of course have to monitor this ensuring posts that truly belong in either thread do go there.

All round this will be a super time saver for us money saving experts!

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind Regards, tartantipster.


New thread started on this for feedback.

Paraphrased
Idea: Split into two forums - GIOL offers and GIOL chat
Problem: GIOL is cluttered with chat
Reason: Keep only offers on first page and chat out the way
Benefit 1: "those not in need of, or wanting to avoid wading through pages of meaningless banter, could just get straight down to business"
Benefit 2: making it easier too for Newcomers / Beginners / Amateur Match-Bettors to source the information that they require

Still only two benefits listed

It's not exactly what I said is it,

Not word for word, but essentially the same, without missing out any key points.

tartantipster wrote: »

D) I think is adequately covered by the stickies.

It is no where near adequately covered, and my suggestion would outstrip the current set-up by a country mile. My concept is far superior, more uniform, and seemless.

Well, whether it's adequate or not is not absolutely measurable, so we'll have to agree to disagree on that. Not sure what help isn't provided by the newbie question thread.

Minor point - threads like this would get less attention if it was hidden away in a subforum.

Mariner13

boristbear wrote: »

I can’t understand all the defeatist ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’ (someone actually used that phrase!) attitude that has been so quickly mooted on this thread. Things move on and if this forum doesn’t it will die. I happen to think TT suggestion is a good one and it would certainly be better for me if it was organised as he suggests but even if you don’t agree you should be thinking of ways to improve the board rather that getting all defensive. Several people actually criticised my lunchtime post supporting TT suggestion because I said it was what ‘I’ ‘wanted’. !!!!!! I am not even allowed my own opinion now? I don’t claim to speak for anyone else and I never have done.

OT but I also want to comment on something said by someone below about the WillHill BOGOF being a good example of how the board works well! I have to disagree, it is so clogged with drivel that it is now near useless IMO. Easier and quicker to check the willhill site directly – to me this a clear sign that there is room for improvement. Some of you guys may not have a problem wading through 2-3 pages to see if there might be a new offer but I, and I’d even go as far as to say maybe a couple of others too, would view this as a waste of valuable time.

Why is "if it ain't broke don't fix it" defeatist. Changes are only good if they change things for the better. Imo (and the opinion of many others who have contributed to this thread) the changes TT proposes wont make things better.

This forum die It seems more popular than ever to me. I see no evidence of it dieing whatsoever.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and i respect yours and TT's, however the post you made earlier, and even the one quoted above, seem to be looking at things from just your perspective. This forum is not about you, and should not adjust itself to suit you. Ideally it should be as the majority want it, however even then it's Martin's forum so he can arrange it as he sees fit. People (myself included) can either like it or lump it.

I agree it's always good to look at ways of improving things, but making changes for changes sake isn't always the best. I don't think i've been defensive in any way, and neither have others such as MK or NichStuff - we've just given our opinions the same as you. It would be pretty boring if we all agreed on everything.

I mentioned the Will Hill Bogof thread earlier, and the points you make are valid. However TT's suggestion wouldn't change that thread at all. The thread is an "offers" thread - it alerts people to the prospect of making money, however like you said it is littered with pointless (in some peoples opinion) chat. I believe that even TT doesn't expect BGs to weed out the chatty posts from the thread. He stated that as long as the original post contained an offer, then that thread would remain on his "offers board", and he would expect discussion of said offer - TT if that is not accurate then please correct me and explain exactly how the changes you propose would affect that specific thread.

Final point - you mention "wading through 2-3 pages" - does it really take that long ? - I just hold down my left mouse button on the slider thing on my window and move very quickly up and down the page. Takes next to no time really. In fact, ironically, i reckon i could have skimmed through the last couple of pages in every thread on pages1 and 2 in the time i've spent typing this post:rolleyes:

Mariner13

OldElstonian wrote: »

Just to exercise MY right to free speech:

1. We don't need two forums

2. We won't get two forums

3. If it bugs you that much (which from the length of your many replies it evidently does) then you could always start your own forum specifically structured to your requirements.

4. I think this thread deserves one of these:




I will say no more on this matter.

Post of the month imo - it really did make me lol :T

tartantipster

Mariner13 wrote: »

Post of the month imo - it really did make me lol :T

Please see this post: Today, 6:59 PM, Post #102, tartantipster, Serious MoneySaving Fan.:beer:

tartantipster

Mariner13 wrote: »

Why is "if it ain't broke don't fix it" defeatist. Changes are only good if they change things for the better. Imo (and the opinion of many others who have contributed to this thread) the changes TT proposes wont make things better.

They will make it much better.

This forum die It seems more popular than ever to me. I see no evidence of it dieing whatsoever.

This is true, it is not dying.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and i respect yours and TT's, however the post you made earlier, and even the one quoted above, seem to be looking at things from just your perspective. This forum is not about you, and should not adjust itself to suit you. Ideally it should be as the majority want it, however even then it's Martin's forum so he can arrange it as he sees fit. People (myself included) can either like it or lump it.

There is a great deal of support for this idea, and more likely that have not posted.

I agree it's always good to look at ways of improving things, but making changes for changes sake isn't always the best. I don't think i've been defensive in any way, and neither have others such as MK or NichStuff - we've just given our opinions the same as you. It would be pretty boring if we all agreed on everything.

This is not change for change sake, it is for advancement.

I mentioned the Will Hill Bogof thread earlier, and the points you make are valid. However TT's suggestion wouldn't change that thread at all. The thread is an "offers" thread - it alerts people to the prospect of making money, however like you said it is littered with pointless (in some peoples opinion) chat. I believe that even TT doesn't expect BGs to weed out the chatty posts from the thread. He stated that as long as the original post contained an offer, then that thread would remain on his "offers board", and he would expect discussion of said offer - TT if that is not accurate then please correct me and explain exactly how the changes you propose would affect that specific thread.

I don't expect BG's to weed out individual posts


Final point - you mention "wading through 2-3 pages" - does it really take that long ? - I just hold down my left mouse button on the slider thing on my window and move very quickly up and down the page. Takes next to no time really. In fact, ironically, i reckon i could have skimmed through the last couple of pages in every thread on pages1 and 2 in the time i've spent typing this post:rolleyes:

The new two Forum approach would largely disolve this problem.

:beer::beer: