Sorted got shot of the `Edward` Just plain old John King (i censored it myself)

Thanks Tony

You could always sign off using your Nickname David (no offence meant), seriously though i do fell that allowing pseudonyms only encourages discourteous and often pointless posts.

One thing i would like to do though is remove the Edward from my title and just be John King anybody know if that is possibe?

John

While I agree with most of what Tony says and strangely enough most of the other contributors to this thread. (I do dislike the discourteous postings that are made on some other forums) I will stick on the use of a nick name and believe that it should be allowed. Many years ago I was told by a member of another walking association, that if you wanted any thing done and you were not on the top table the only was to say ' I have heard xxx is to be done' Having watched that and other associations over the years and not just those involved in walking, I have come to the conclusion he was right. I also think that some people have some great ideas and views but are reluctant to air them in case unintentional offence is given or taken. Unfortunately some do take offence and action against those that express a point of view not in keeping with there own.
Sorry if this is a bit of a ramble but "She Who Must Be Obeyed" has had me over to the shops in Newcastle all day and I am still a bit shell shocked.
David H

My goodness, there are more conspiracy theories here than Mohamed Al Fayed could have come up with. Just a few comments from the Chairman:-
· There is no censorship on the forum. There is an acceptable use policy with Garfield as moderator but it?s about 18 months since anything was removed. Incidentally the person concerned re-posted the item and we left it on for people to make their own minds up.
· I don?t like the idea of anonymous postings. If you want your views to be taken seriously then you should be prepared to put your name to them. If that results in a rather po-faced forum at times then that?s a price worth paying, especially since it avoids the inane chatter you find on many forums.
· I don?t think there was any deep significance in including ?date joined? when the forum was designed. I will canvas views on whether we need to continue with it at the next National Committee meeting.
· I?ll admit to being a retired, middle aged professional, but these tend to be the people with the time, skills and inclination to do the work needed to keep the LDWA going. The constitution now sets a limit on how long a member can serve on the committee and this is having the effect of bringing in new people with fresh ideas.
· The forum is extremely useful in identifying issues that the NC should look at, and committee members are encouraged to respond where appropriate. For example, the comments (criticisms) of the website were taken seriously and most of them have been incorporated in the recent changes. A downside is that the forum works best when responses are swift, and this is not always possible if the subject is complex or there is a wide range of views.
· The status of the forum will improve the more input we get from the widest possible cross section of the membership. Keep those comments coming!

I think the need for censorship and fear of personal abuse and repercussions on a forum like this are overplayed in many peoples minds.

In actual fact, personal abuse and unacceptable behaviour is not the norm, and quite rare in practice. A good discussion may become 'heated' between different viewpoints, but most forumites know where to draw the line and stop at anything personal. Sometimes the situation may build up out of control, but one can normally see it coming and a warning to 'cool it' has the desired effect.

I have met persons I have had major disagreements with on other forums (not walking), but there has never been any subsequent bad feeling and we all have a laugh and joke about it afterwards. The forum is a great way of puting a viewpoint or controversial idea across for discussion, to see what reaction it receives - good or bad. But this needs input from more people, then possibly some ideas may be taken up by the organisation in the future. Matt.

I agree John, but I think the only censorship I have witnessed here is self-censorship. Obviously, bad language, slander and other disrespectful gestures will not be tolerated.

The fora do need a route through to the National Committee. Local Groups have a representative there and, whilst I know Tony takes a great interest in these topics, it would be useful to have someone there who keeps an ear to the ground and raises issues mentioned here with the appropriate committee member.

Garfield

I have a suggestion how about frank informal, uncensored, and constructive discussion on an open forum designed and used by adults that are grown up enough not to be offended by there interpretation of what may have been said by somebody they do not know.

Even the most bizzare ideas may evolve into something useful with enough input from folk with differing views.

So why not express yourselves and be man/woman enough to stand up and be counted without the need to hide behind a nickname.

Out of time must dash back Sunday of to Rotheram something to do with a 50 mile day out

I completely agree with Julie! Expressing opinions and trying to get things changed when they don't work or don't make sense is fine; it's vitriolic attacks and highly personal criticism that do the damage, and put as many people off as they attract. It may make the person doing the sounding off feel better for a bit, but in an organisation that relies entirely on volunteers it rarely achieves much, other than putting people off of volunteering, so if using real names rather than nick-names encourages people to think twice before posting that's probably a good thing.

I'm also puzzled about what repercussions might follow from using real names on the forum. If a kit check is included in the rules for a particular event, there probably would be repercussions from turning up without the required kit, but just for complaining on the forum that the stated requirement for a portable operating theatre is a bit over the top....? I wouldn't have thought so. Maybe I'm just being a bit naive? (I'm sure someone will tell me if I am! ;-) )

I'm also not convinced this has that much to do with social class - unless the much-maligned middle classes have a monopoly on good manners, which seems a bit unlikely somehow. Or am I being naive and politically unsophisticated about that as well???? :-)

There is clearly an issue here though. While the committee structure works quite well in generally getting things organised, and committee members do a huge amount of hard work to achieve that (most of which is invisible unless it goes badly wrong for some reason), getting strongly-felt emotions registered through a committee structure can be tricky if not impossible. What committees do deal with well (on a good day, anyhow) are clearly-defined problems and suggestions for improvements, which can be hard to come up when you're hopping mad about something.

Suggestions, anyone?

(Helen)

As the person who created these fora in the first place, and still maintains and moderates them, I'm puzzled that you feel there is censorship.

What 'repercussions' could arise from making valid comments about kit-checks? I've made a number of comments about them, as well as my pet-hate - grouping. I don't see that hiding behind anonymity and making ruder noises would further my case. It would just make a lot of people upset.

I have always felt that if you have comments or criticisms you should put your name to them.

As a runner I too would like to see some recognition of our contribution to the Association, but we do have a National Committee and an AGM to put those ideas through.

Garfield

Speaking as someone who subscibes to a football club website and belongs to a supporters group (strictly for professional purposes, you understand...) I have to say it's a nice change to come on to the forum here, even if it is ever so slightly polite and restrained. Other places - forums, pubs - where you get these free-for-alls it always ends up with whichever bloke (99.9% of the time it's a bloke) can bang on the loudest/pontificate the longest and it's a right switch-off.
By the way, David, your LDW & TR Association idea is great.

This of course fetches back the Old Chestnuts Should our details be published on a thread? and Should we be allowed to use a nickname?. Personally I have rarely been bothered by what others think of my views and would normally be quiet happy to allow my details to be published but there have been occasions when it would have been more diplomatic if they had not.

From this thread it is obvious that others are reluctant to air their opinions. So maybe it is now time to reconsider and allow those that wish to remain anonymous to do so and to use a nickname. This may just boost the rather pathetic use of this site.
David H

Agreed. The LDWA sometimes does seem to have rather an impenetrable cliche at times, which is fine, but quite unsustainable if the organisation is to grow and florish.

Very often I have wanted to reply to a thread on the forum, but have stopped myself for fear of the repercussions. The nearest I have got is challenging kit checks :-)

My limited experience of the LDWA (and virtually every other sport/organisation I have been involved in) has revealed insider backstabbing, malicious rumour, gossip, exaggeration and near fisticuffs at times. And a general "I know better" attitude, to everything.

Yet the forum is like a gentlemans club, all views are kept bottled up, and most dare not say a word or add anything radical to any debate.

Oh for a some honest thoughts and a 'duel at dawn' (a walk off??) between antagonists!! Matt.

I for one am happy to give my opinion and air my views as i know a few others are that post on here, but and as Matt says that would be the best way to invigorate the forums and bring fresh ideas and potential members onto the forums and possibly into the LDWA as members

In fact i think the post that say`s that the LDWA discussion on these forums had the highest number of hits, bears this out.

I know a few FRA members local to me that joined the LDWA on the back of That particular debate.

However it seems pointless saying what you think on a forum where somebody that probably do`s not know you puts his/hers interpretation on your words and decides to remove them without allowing debate, not exactly democratic in my view

John

well i'm glad someone saw my apology Rebecca, I also put down my reasons for my behavoir, which is why they deleted it

By more people joining in and adding their comments, opinions and views, whatever they may be.
But they don't and won't ..... so that's it. Matt.

I saw your post before it was deleted.

From a personal experience there does seem to be a hard core of LDWA who seem reluctant to change and even quote their LDWA number as a way of saying 'I've been in it longer than you', which is a shame as it squashes new ideas before they even have chance.

It would be nice to have a forum where ideas could be thrashed around without it coming down to how long someone has been a member, or getting personal, but I'm not sure how this could be achieved.

well i had a post deleted on the cant canolbarth forum, but then i'm not middle class, middle management,or retired,
I'm a Yorkshireman, I say it, as I see it.

Matt. It is all to do with the profile of the L D W A and other walking associations / groups. Middle class, middle management / professional, Middle aged / retired. Trained not to rock the boat or get in to it till you are sure which way it will go. Then ditch those that rock the boat.
An example is the thread on TRA. The answer to this one is simple and obvious. Change our name to LDW&TRA, and incorporate the TRA in to the LDWA as a group. But there will be all sorts of dithering in the back ground until a strong enough senior member of the LDWA says yea or nay.
David H

Not sure there is enough input from members with differing views, to become really 'hot under the collar' when posting, and then require censor. Pity as I miss those pithy arguments/views.

Majority of members seem to read the threads but are too scared to post their thoughts, especially if even slightly controversial. Matt.

Is there any on the forum?

i.e is anything removed if somebody fells it is inappropriate i don`t mean the obvious offensive stuff as i really don`t think anybody that is a member of such a splendid and forthright body as the LDWA would post any.

Just curious

John