Comments and Suggestions.

The board was "upgraded" to phpBB3 is what happened. I don't care much for it either... too flashy.

AWESOME Dalton pic!!!

I'm more concerned about all of the problems I've having with this software. The text field will not stay in it's place for one.

I'm converting it back to BB2, just a few minor touch-ups, then all will be set and remain untouched for the forseeable future. Apologies for any software issues which I was obviously unaware any switchover would cause. Thanks for everyone's patience, this will all be picture perfect within the hour.

Admit it. You just like playing with your toy, M.

:)

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

Admit it. You just like playing with your toy, M.

:)

And the parallel of me ending up making a right mess isn't lost on me either.

I had a few ideas for cleaning up some of the forum names and descriptions. The first three forums under the 'Bond' section currently look like this:

1. Bond 23
News and discussion

2. Bond - General Discussion & News
Bond discussion and news unrelated to Bond 23

3. Bond Films - Reviews and Discussion
Dr No - Quantum Of Solace

The problem is that the names & descriptions are misleading/unclear, and consequently there are numerous threads in the wrong places.

The 1st forum is for Bond 23 News & discussion of said news, as it says.

The 2nd forum is for General Bond News - news that's unrelated to Bond 23 or the series' future (eg. Bond concerts, Ursula Andress giving birth). For some reason, there are threads in the 2nd forum that are for discussing Bond 23 (eg. possible Bond girls, possible locations, possible supporting characters) as well as threads about the series' distant future (eg. Bond 24 directors, 'The Future of James Bond').

The 3rd forum is for discussion of the series, not posting of news (or discussion of news). Because it has virtually the same name as the 2nd forum, there are threads posted in the 2nd forum (General Bond News) that should be in the 3rd (eg. Truffaut vs Bond).

Obviously there's been some confusion about what to post where. New forum names and some re-organizing of threads could fix this. Here are my ideas for forum re-branding:

1. Bond 23 and Beyond
Discuss, speculate on and post news about the film series' future

2. General Bond News
News items related to the world of 007

3. The James Bond Films
Discuss, debate, review and rank the films from Dr No to Quantum of Solace

With this set-up, the names and descriptions are clear.
And of course quite a few threads will have to be moved by a global moderator. :)

Thanks for listening to my concerns.

What about a "Caption This Picture of The Day" thread? I've seen it that other blogs and websites and they are usually odd, bizarre, or weird pictures that bring out the humor in most posters.

There is this Bond caption thread, usually with a new pic each week: https://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com/t204-bondcapcon-you-were-expecting-someone-else

Louis Armstrong wrote:

I had a few ideas for cleaning up some of the forum names and descriptions. The first three forums under the 'Bond' section currently look like this:

1. Bond 23
News and discussion

2. Bond - General Discussion & News
Bond discussion and news unrelated to Bond 23

3. Bond Films - Reviews and Discussion
Dr No - Quantum Of Solace

The problem is that the names & descriptions are misleading/unclear, and consequently there are numerous threads in the wrong places.

The 1st forum is for Bond 23 News & discussion of said news, as it says.

The 2nd forum is for General Bond News - news that's unrelated to Bond 23 or the series' future (eg. Bond concerts, Ursula Andress giving birth). For some reason, there are threads in the 2nd forum that are for discussing Bond 23 (eg. possible Bond girls, possible locations, possible supporting characters) as well as threads about the series' distant future (eg. Bond 24 directors, 'The Future of James Bond').

The 3rd forum is for discussion of the series, not posting of news (or discussion of news). Because it has virtually the same name as the 2nd forum, there are threads posted in the 2nd forum (General Bond News) that should be in the 3rd (eg. Truffaut vs Bond).

Obviously there's been some confusion about what to post where. New forum names and some re-organizing of threads could fix this. Here are my ideas for forum re-branding:

1. Bond 23 and Beyond
Discuss, speculate on and post news about the film series' future

2. General Bond News
News items related to the world of 007

3. The James Bond Films
Discuss, debate, review and rank the films from Dr No to Quantum of Solace

With this set-up, the names and descriptions are clear.
And of course quite a few threads will have to be moved by a global moderator. :)

Thanks for listening to my concerns.

Thanks Louis. I rearranged or renamed the top three Bond sections recently due to far too many Bond 23-related posts turning up in the "Bond General Discussion" topic, which meant I also had to move a whole pile of Bond 23-related posts into the correct "Bond 23" section. Your suggestions above make a lot of sense. I would have liked to have had a section titled simply "Bond 23" as that in itself will be the major talking point on these forums in the forseeable future and this section could end up flooded even solely as a "Bond 23" section as further news comes in. But, at the same time, we really don't need to be adding even more Bond sections to the boards, as there's plenty of Bond sections and topics already, some of them not even particularly popular.

So what I'll do is try out those suggestions of yours Louis, but at the same time I'd politely request anyone posting in the "Bond 23/Future of Bond" areas to firstly make sure your post goes into the correct section as titled on the front page, and secondly to have a quick browse through the subjects beforehand to see if there's an identical (or near-enough-identical) topic for you to post into as opposed to starting a new thread. This would save myself and the moderators an awful lot of thread-merging, post-moving, etc. In short, let's try and keep things compact and easy to navigate, especially the Bond 23 section, a section which could play a key part in the immediate and maybe longer-term future of these forums.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

There is this Bond caption thread, usually with a new pic each week: https://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com/t204-bondcapcon-you-were-expecting-someone-else

That's cool. I checked it out. But what about non-Bond pictures and non-Bond caption threads?

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Louis Armstrong wrote:

There is this Bond caption thread, usually with a new pic each week: https://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com/t204-bondcapcon-you-were-expecting-someone-else

That's cool. I checked it out. But what about non-Bond pictures and non-Bond caption threads?

Please feel free to set up any threads we don't have here already, GS. Make yourself at home, and help yourself to the free drinks and disreputable other "freebies" in the "Beyond" section.

So, what are people's thoughts on avatars that have bare boobs in them?

I'm used to more conservative avatars from oldMI6, and I'm just seeing if anyone takes issue with it. If we all think it's okay...

Any excuse to flaunt Diora.

Not fussed too much otherwise. Knowing me, I'll switch soon enough to something 'conservative'.

Would Sarah Palin's rack be considered a conservative avatar?

CJB wrote:

Would Sarah Palin's rack be considered a conservative avatar?

Lumme.

Well, yes, but of course.

CJB wrote:

Would Sarah Palin's rack be considered a conservative avatar?

Depends how much support they need from big government.bra. Floppalalopalot = Social Democrat

Socialist gals are the best screws. Free love etc.

Sharky wrote:

CJB wrote:

Would Sarah Palin's rack be considered a conservative avatar?

Depends how much support they need from big government.bra. Floppalalopalot = Social Democrat

Though I have heard she's a fan of trickle-down.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

So, what are people's thoughts on avatars that have bare boobs in them?

I'm used to more conservative avatars from oldMI6, and I'm just seeing if anyone takes issue with it. If we all think it's okay...

I'm okay with it. It doesn't bother me in the slightest. Honestly, I'd like to see full-frontal nudity in the avatars. Is that against any policy?

Actually, I think the breasteses need to be bigger on some of these avatars; a few of them look like flat-chested, androgynous heroin addicts.

I guess we'll know how "tolerant" and liberal we all are when someone wants to put a picture of a nude male in their avatar.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I guess we'll know how "tolerant" and liberal we all are when someone wants to put a picture of a nude male in their avatar.

Paging Daniel Craig.

I don't mind.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I guess we'll know how "tolerant" and liberal we all are when someone wants to put a picture of a nude male in their avatar.

Paging Daniel Craig.

No, paging Babs Broccoli.

I like Dog's avatar.

CJB wrote:

Sharky wrote:

CJB wrote:

Would Sarah Palin's rack be considered a conservative avatar?

Depends how much support they need from big government.bra. Floppalalopalot = Social Democrat

Though I have heard she's a fan of trickle-down.

I heard she'll adopt a fair trade policy with my banana republic.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

So, what are people's thoughts on avatars that have bare boobs in them?

I'm used to more conservative avatars from oldMI6, and I'm just seeing if anyone takes issue with it. If we all think it's okay...

My two cents.....

Yep, I've posted puppies before. Yep, I've posted bouncing puppies, nothing anybody can't see out on the high street on a sunny day I suppose. Never felt the need to show the noses, as it doesn't take a scientist to see where it leads.....

Today: Tits
Tomorrow: Bigger tits
The next day: Tits & minge
The weekend: Big cock & balls avatar staring at me every time I log in, probably accompanied by some utterly pointless and unnecessary argument about tolerance, along with the possibility of top brass taking one in the arse from Forumotion over it.

Hardly worth it when we've got so much leeway here already, which I appreciate. After all, this stuff plays out as three warnings and the door hitting your arse on the way out anywhere else.

I love a great rack as much as the next guy, but I just don't think this place needs the sh*t if and when it goes further. Sure, we don't need rules here, but that's because everyone's smart and trusted enough to know what will or won't land us in sh*t or shut us down. If we abuse that to the point where action's called for and trust is f*cked, then we may as well have never left MI6, CB.n or wherever.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

So, what are people's thoughts on avatars that have bare boobs in them?

I object. I'd prefer to see pictures of the USS Enterprise.

If there are serious objections to tits in avatars, as Laz suggests, I'm happy to leave. Tits are the first thing a baby sees and from p.3 onwards they're all over British newspapers.

Mine is Pamela Franklin, by the way.