Take it as a compliment. No reason to publish the load of old tosh other than to fill a mag. AFKA is right that VOTV has had nothing but praise on this site and is really poor this has been done in return
Have just read Lawson & Everitt's pieces. The latter obviously looking to try and balance what was a pretty poorly researched piece by the former.
I'm not sure if Lawson felt he was being devil's advocate, but I would have hoped for an acknowledgement of all the good work done by this site and the many contributors and especially those who run it, either by him or Everitt.
Some complete inaccuracies as well, for example in suggesting that there is a single political view. This on a site to which Everitt himself contributes!! Poor judgement in printing without validating and I don't think Rick's piece is enough of a balance in that respect.
Thanks as ever to those who run and contribute to this site. It's much appreciated.
I've now read it. I thought Airman, thankfully, took a lot of trouble to put forward alternative views and the many many positives that CL brings to all things CAFC. I also happened to agree with a fair few of JL's comments. I got the impression that he was trying to be a bit tongue in cheek, but rather flopped in this aim. As Airman said, the mods have a very difficult time of trying to decide what is or isn't acceptable. As a lefty female, I'm quite obviously not going to like the right wing warriors, the hatey or the anti-woman stuff. Others clearly think it's OK. The very broad spectrum of views expressed are actually what makes this site quite remarkable. All power to AFKA's and Lookies elbows.
I have read it, and weirdly and unintentionally some of the things he describes happening on here make Charlton Life more attractive rather than less so. However you read the article there is no way you could think Charlton Life is dull and grey and one dimensional like so many others are. The writer did not say this place is boring that's for sure. Charlton Life is a pretty vast landscape, and for my part I think it is absolutely wonderful, and very very well run and moderated. I would like to think that CL is not established as a place of validation to everybody who comes here, and that our excellent mods are here to pander to everybody's need to be all lurved up by them. I see it as my part to try to contribute in a positive way. Contributions? The writer of the VOTV piece could try 'aving some of that, like say it to our face as it were.
Take it as a compliment. No reason to publish the load of old tosh other than to fill a mag. AFKA is right that VOTV has had nothing but praise on this site and is really poor this has been done in return
Dan i can understand your frustration but you know most of us think this is generally a cracking well regulated site. When John Lawson has set up a better one then he can have a pop if he so desires, and in theory then his view might carry more credibility. As it stands it is just some bloke's opinion, no more no less than that. It's a bit like someone who has never kicked a ball shouting "Stephens, you useless twat!", you have to decide how much of a valuable opinion it really is. :-) Have a better week this week ;-)
VOTV is an independent fanzine. If you don't agree with an opinion or a dig against a mates website, deal with it. That's what makes VOTV what it is.
Fair enough. But it can't expect free advertising on here then, can it?
Depends if the owner values free speach or not which via the internet is a null point. The CL article will attract punters in return.
Free speech?
As far as I'm aware the fellas that run CL don't make a penny from it. In fact, it costs them money.
Someone takes advantage of the platform they offer to advertise their own commercial venture - which they do use to make money - and then allows the first bunch of fellas to get slagged off via their commercial venture.
Money is made because of the free advertising this site affords VOTV.
That's not freedom of speech - that's taking the piss.
VOTV is an independent fanzine. If you don't agree with an opinion or a dig against a mates website, deal with it. That's what makes VOTV what it is.
Fair enough. But it can't expect free advertising on here then, can it?
Depends if the owner values free speach or not which via the internet is a null point. The CL article will attract punters in return.
Free speech?
As far as I'm aware the fellas that run CL don't make a penny from it. In fact, it costs them money.
Someone takes advantage of the platform they offer advertise their own commercial venture - which they do use to make money - and then allows the first bunch of fellas to get slagged off via their commercial venture.
Money is made because of the free advertising this site affords VOTV.
That's not freedom of speech - that's taking the piss.
I can already tell you know the owner.
An internet message board is all about peoples opinions and the debate between them. That's what supplies the interest and demand. If you don't supply the contrary opinion then you are supplying the interesting content via the argument.
The owner will benefit out of this one way or the other, whether that be financially or socially who knows. But every effort ends in a reward.
VOTV offers an opinion, that's what makes it what it is, nothing more, nothing less.
VOTV is an independent fanzine. If you don't agree with an opinion or a dig against a mates website, deal with it. That's what makes VOTV what it is.
Fair enough. But it can't expect free advertising on here then, can it?
Depends if the owner values free speach or not which via the internet is a null point. The CL article will attract punters in return.
Free speech?
As far as I'm aware the fellas that run CL don't make a penny from it. In fact, it costs them money.
Someone takes advantage of the platform they offer to advertise their own commercial venture - which they do use to make money - and then allows the first bunch of fellas to get slagged off via their commercial venture.
Money is made because of the free advertising this site affords VOTV.
That's not freedom of speech - that's taking the piss.
Dunno about that. I wouldn't think votv makes a profit. In fact, it's probably in the same boat as this site in that respect.
Just read it myself and firstly fair play AB for trying to redress the balance. Similarly, if I were AFKA I would be mightily peeved as the keyboard warrior tends not to err towards the vanguard. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and the fact that CL facilitates that, whilst knowing when people have crossed the line is laudible beyond belief. The game is about opinions and believe you me I've been villified for some of mine, professionaly and personally. But the fact that a couple of guys are prepared to take time out to ensure that the CAFC community can espouse their views, have a bit of light relief from their working day, make friends and share tales, humour and problems is surely a positive thing so take it in your stride boys and keep going.
VOTV is an independent fanzine. If you don't agree with an opinion or a dig against a mates website, deal with it. That's what makes VOTV what it is.
Fair enough. But it can't expect free advertising on here then, can it?
Depends if the owner values free speach or not which via the internet is a null point. The CL article will attract punters in return.
Free speech?
As far as I'm aware the fellas that run CL don't make a penny from it. In fact, it costs them money.
Someone takes advantage of the platform they offer to advertise their own commercial venture - which they do use to make money - and then allows the first bunch of fellas to get slagged off via their commercial venture.
Money is made because of the free advertising this site affords VOTV.
That's not freedom of speech - that's taking the piss.
Dunno about that. I wouldn't think votv makes a profit. In fact, it's probably in the same boat as this site in that respect.
Maybe not, but it charges for it's product, doesn't it? Therefore it is a commercial venture.
Comments
I'm not sure if Lawson felt he was being devil's advocate, but I would have hoped for an acknowledgement of all the good work done by this site and the many contributors and especially those who run it, either by him or Everitt.
Some complete inaccuracies as well, for example in suggesting that there is a single political view. This on a site to which Everitt himself contributes!! Poor judgement in printing without validating and I don't think Rick's piece is enough of a balance in that respect.
Thanks as ever to those who run and contribute to this site. It's much appreciated.
As Airman said, the mods have a very difficult time of trying to decide what is or isn't acceptable. As a lefty female, I'm quite obviously not going to like the right wing warriors, the hatey or the anti-woman stuff. Others clearly think it's OK. The very broad spectrum of views expressed are actually what makes this site quite remarkable. All power to AFKA's and Lookies elbows.
Charlton Life is a pretty vast landscape, and for my part I think it is absolutely wonderful, and very very well run and moderated.
I would like to think that CL is not established as a place of validation to everybody who comes here, and that our excellent mods are here to pander to everybody's need to be all lurved up by them. I see it as my part to try to contribute in a positive way.
Contributions? The writer of the VOTV piece could try 'aving some of that, like say it to our face as it were.
Spot on. Sometimes less is more
It's a bit like someone who has never kicked a ball shouting "Stephens, you useless twat!", you have to decide how much of a valuable opinion it really is. :-)
Have a better week this week ;-)
As far as I'm aware the fellas that run CL don't make a penny from it. In fact, it costs them money.
Someone takes advantage of the platform they offer to advertise their own commercial venture - which they do use to make money - and then allows the first bunch of fellas to get slagged off via their commercial venture.
Money is made because of the free advertising this site affords VOTV.
That's not freedom of speech - that's taking the piss.
It's no big deal-forums and fanzines never are.
An internet message board is all about peoples opinions and the debate between them. That's what supplies the interest and demand. If you don't supply the contrary opinion then you are supplying the interesting content via the argument.
The owner will benefit out of this one way or the other, whether that be financially or socially who knows. But every effort ends in a reward.
VOTV offers an opinion, that's what makes it what it is, nothing more, nothing less.
Keep up the good work AFKA
What's that got to do with anything ?
Edits above for the hard of thinking. Edit below for me.
I was once told on here though that anyone who offers me abuse gets a thank you card from afka - anyone got the VOTV address ?
An internet message board will pop up 5 mins after you close this. A proper fanzine won't.
Why can't you accept an opinion?
Can't agree with that at all.
Would you say your comment was just a teensy bit snide?
Just my opinion like.