These forums may contain mild adult content and are not associated with EON, Sony or any other companies and do not reflect their views.
 
HomeHome  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 The layout.

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
AuthorMessage
retrokitty
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 499
Member Since : 2011-03-15
Location : Beautiful British Columbia

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:34 am

Thanks, M. It's not for porn... :cyclops:

It's just discussions around booze, cigs, chicks, and other bits and pieces come up and that would be a good place to contain it so that it can be avoided or sought out. These are topics in most Bond movies and other movies of the mid-20th century so not entirely off-topic.
Back to top Go down
M
Administrator
Administrator
avatar

Posts : 536
Member Since : 2010-01-12

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:38 am

I'll set it up. You can moderate it if you like?
Back to top Go down
http://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com
retrokitty
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 499
Member Since : 2011-03-15
Location : Beautiful British Columbia

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:41 am

That's fine... I think I'll be here often... Can someone give me a rundown on how to moderate here...? We aren't cops but I don't know what to do if something needs removed or moved.... Or maybe I just alert Tux or Brown... Whatever is easiest.

Back to top Go down
Control
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
avatar

Posts : 5137
Member Since : 2010-05-13
Location : Slumber, Inc.

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:49 am

retrokitty wrote:
Can someone give me a rundown on how to moderate here...?

It's easy. If anyone posts the word "sh*t", send them a warning.

If they post a one-sentence reply, send them a warning.

If they talk about tits, then request a ban.
Back to top Go down
retrokitty
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 499
Member Since : 2011-03-15
Location : Beautiful British Columbia

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 3:50 am

Mr. Brown wrote:
retrokitty wrote:
Can someone give me a rundown on how to moderate here...?

It's easy. If anyone posts the word "sh*t", send them a warning.

If they post a one-sentence reply, send them a warning.

If they talk about tits, then request a ban.

I'm in the wrong forum then... I thought it went like this:

If anyone posts the word "sh*t", send them spelling tips.

If they post a one-sentence reply, send them advice on smilies.

If they talk about tits, then request a photo.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest
avatar


PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 4:21 am

There was a place called Baker St ...
Back to top Go down
retrokitty
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 499
Member Since : 2011-03-15
Location : Beautiful British Columbia

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 4:24 am

ambler wrote:
There was a place called Baker St ...

It's in the deli. The deli was moved to the bottom of the page.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest
avatar


PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 4:29 am

I meant it might be an amusing name for a vice section. You could get Dublo to come over and shut it down.
Back to top Go down
Control
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
avatar

Posts : 5137
Member Since : 2010-05-13
Location : Slumber, Inc.

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 4:41 am

laugh

I think it'd be a fitting title for the proposed "late night" subforum.

Let me call up Helga Kurylenko.
Back to top Go down
retrokitty
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 499
Member Since : 2011-03-15
Location : Beautiful British Columbia

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:05 am

My understanding was that Baker St. thread was going to be a bit smutty... not the entire Late Night section.

Back to top Go down
retrokitty
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 499
Member Since : 2011-03-15
Location : Beautiful British Columbia

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:09 am

By the way, if you log out, you can still see some forums including The Scratching Post... hahahaha.. now, if that's what we want to let the public view, ok... but, well... hahahah
Back to top Go down
M
Administrator
Administrator
avatar

Posts : 536
Member Since : 2010-01-12

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:22 am

retrokitty wrote:
By the way, if you log out, you can still see some forums including The Scratching Post...

Not any more. :)
Back to top Go down
http://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com
Makeshift Python
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
avatar

Posts : 6800
Member Since : 2011-03-14
Location : Up

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:53 am

I thought the Multiplex section was going to be within the Film Discussion section. Or does that not work with this board format?
Back to top Go down
The White Tuxedo
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
avatar

Posts : 6062
Member Since : 2011-03-14
Location : ELdorado 5-9970

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:00 am

Makeshift Python wrote:
I thought the Multiplex section was going to be within the Film Discussion section. Or does that not work with this board format?

Thought so too. I'll mention it to M. It won't be the end of the world if it's not. It would simply streamline things on the main page.
Back to top Go down
Makeshift Python
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
avatar

Posts : 6800
Member Since : 2011-03-14
Location : Up

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:06 am

I'm not complaining. I was just a bit concerned on how the board functions. There's still plenty of work to do anyway but so far I think we're off to a good start. :)
Back to top Go down
Control
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
avatar

Posts : 5137
Member Since : 2010-05-13
Location : Slumber, Inc.

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:03 pm

Makeshift Python wrote:
I thought the Multiplex section was going to be within the Film Discussion section. Or does that not work with this board format?

Might not be an option. I'm not sure, though.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Delicatessen placed below General Discussion, either. But, that's just my suggestion.

I'm pleased with the overall layout, however.
Back to top Go down
M
Administrator
Administrator
avatar

Posts : 536
Member Since : 2010-01-12

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:16 am

I've had some interest via PMs about possible layout/colour changes and potential improvements to the forum. If anybody has any particular preferences for how the forums should look, or any really good ideas, please feel free to post them here. Thanks.

Back to top Go down
http://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com
Largo's Shark
Moderator
Moderator


Posts : 10600
Member Since : 2011-03-14

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:24 am

You know, I preferred the generic light background we had before. This dark blue/black Bond logo has got too much going on. Besides it looks a bit like subliminal marketing for Danjaq or somin'. We should try get away from the branding of Bond. That's for MI6 Community.
Back to top Go down
Hilly KCMG
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 5333
Member Since : 2010-05-13
Location : Buckinghamshire

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:33 am

Probably the background could be changed but I don't mind the layout colour-wise for the forum/thread bits.
Back to top Go down
The White Tuxedo
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
avatar

Posts : 6062
Member Since : 2011-03-14
Location : ELdorado 5-9970

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Tue Aug 16, 2011 4:21 am

The layout has changed again. There was nothing wrong with how it was. :)
Back to top Go down
Hilly KCMG
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 5333
Member Since : 2010-05-13
Location : Buckinghamshire

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Tue Aug 16, 2011 5:37 am

Don't mind too much rather than this changing back and forth. Let it settle for a week or something. Try to get used to some layout. No whining on this end. For once.
Back to top Go down
Sleeper
Correspondent
Correspondent
avatar

Posts : 38
Member Since : 2011-03-17

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Sun Sep 04, 2011 5:44 pm

Continued from here: http://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com/t660p30-i-d-like-to-bitch-about-the-layout

I'm not comfortable with being called a liar and having no chance to respond, so I hope it's reasonable that I defend and clarify myself here instead. I suppose this post will be deleted or ignored, even if it brings no accusations or conspiracy theories to the table; as M said, those should have stayed in the PM system (if anywhere).

M wrote:
I do listen to what people have to say here Sleeper and,
Of course you do. You're refuting a claim I didn't make.

M wrote:
as I implied to you through PM, I value your ideas and contributions,
That's not the feeling I got at all.

M wrote:
which is why I was looking into your ideas and acting upon several of them.
Which ideas did you act upon before I started a thread? Just curious. If you thought my ideas were trash (which was fairly obvious), that's fine. But you don't have to tell me you're "looking into" them.

M wrote:
surely we're united as a team in wanting the forums to prosper
I'd hope so (though I think I've lost interest in light of recent events).

M wrote:
[Lazenby]'s put a lot into this place from the start
I'm aware of that. It seems to have clouded his judgment.

M wrote:
I'll happily [mis]quote the very last thing I said to you through PM
And I'll happily provide the rest of the story.

M, to Sleeper through PM, wrote:
Hi Sleeper,

Sorry for not replying sooner. I've been looking through your front page suggestion [it was explicitly more than that] and adding a few touches to it [none of my ideas were used] to see what you think [my opinion wasn't asked], so I'll get back to you as soon as I can with it once I've finished [you didn't and still haven't].

Cheers,



M
A stark contrast to our previously detailed and enthusiastic interaction. So much for your proposition that "we work hard behind the scenes". About three hours later you posted this publicly:

M wrote:
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.
You don't see a contradiction there? You effectively shut down any contribution from me. Combine this contradiction with the fact that

a) you took over 3 days to reply to me (having previously replied within hours),
b) you spent that entire weekend changing the layout (ignoring both me and all my suggestions),
c) you repeatedly claimed before to be "curious about" and "looking forward to" my ideas, and
d) you curtly got back to me with the above shut-down only after I messaged you again

- and yeah, I think feeling brushed off by your doublespeak was perfectly understandable. I'm not naive enough to have thought you interested in my help any longer. God forbid you might hurt my feelings by actually saying that though. I'm certainly not interested in your "preferential treatment" if you feel such a tedious need to tiptoe around one another's feelings. Like I said in my last post, there comes a point where tact just equals a lack of communication. But in light of this laughable Proboards theory about me, I wouldn't be surprised to know that was your goal all along.

I do know that your main motivation in calling me a liar is to save face. You might genuinely think you're in the right; if so, keep on calling me a liar. Doesn't change the fact that you brushed me off. Actions speak louder than words.

M wrote:
I chose to trust you
As opposed to what? Accusing me of trying to destroy your community? Small comfort.

It appears I'm either with you or against you, as evidenced by the theory that I'm the cause of all recent troubles.

M wrote:
I chose to listen to you
I PM'd you. I wouldn't have, had I not known that you listen to your community. And I don't believe for a second that you'd openly tell someone you're not interested in their views. You're not a dictator, and I respect that - but honestly (brace yourself), I would've preferred you say "no thanks, I think I know better" from the outset.

M wrote:
After a few discussions with yourself, which I thought were going along perfectly amicably
That seems to be the main goal with you: politeness.

Pretty irritating when it obscures communication.

M wrote:
Seriously, WTF? I gave you what could be called preferential treatment, trusted you, and you repay me with that?
You also gave me what could be called a blowjob. But that's hardly how it felt, so I won't call it that. I approached you, you requested nothing of me, and you certainly didn't prefer my opinions. Please don't play the victim, it doesn't make you look any better.

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
Lazenby. wrote:
He's been locked out of his own site for a fortnight, had to clean up one messy thread after another, boot people out, explain stuff constantly, try to sort out big technological advancements for the forums, promotion for the forums etc, and he hasn't a bad word to say about anyone here.
Nor do I. Nowhere in my post did I launch a personal attack on him or question his leadership.
The "harsh tone" is what Lazenby clearly objected to,
He also clearly implied that I've attacked your character. You missed that? Convenient.

M wrote:
the "This is crap, I can do better" resentful undertone as highlighted by the snarky comment you've inserted
Please explain how joking that you conquered France indicates my opinion of the layout in any way. That was a jab at Lazenby's self-confessed computer illiteracy. We both know that "big technological advancements" is just a bit hyperbolic - but I guess you gotta be overblown when you're defending against attacks that were never made.

M wrote:
There's no need for all of this, as all I've done on this forum is welcome people's ideas, try to sort out problems and try to act on them (politely too)
I've never said anything to the contrary.

And yes, you're politer than me. Let's move on please.

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
Lazenby. wrote:
The comments quoted below for a start, all of them posted in the proper layout suggestions thread
Merge my thread with the proper one if it bothers you enough to mention it.
We could have avoided all of this if you'd simply done this yourself.
What does that mean? That if I'd done it myself, you'd have ignored me?

The suggestion to merge my thread was genuine and completely free of malice (much like the suggestion that Lazenby make an admin appreciation thread - I'd likely contribute).

M wrote:
Then why start a separate thread for your own layout suggestions when everybody else's opinions are in the clearly-marked existing "Layout" thread?
I thought I made this clear in the original post.

I started a new thread because I thought it'd increase the chances of a) a tangible response, and b) an honest dialogue. And you know what? It did. But if you can't fathom why I'm irritated then please, keep insisting I have a superiority complex. I really don't care at this point.

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
Lazenby. wrote:
But I realise that this isn't all about me, and I appreciate just how much effort M has put into this place
I hope you're not insinuating something about me, but I think you are.
No comment necessary.
So it's alright in your book to attack and accuse so long as it's done in a dodgy, backhanded, and plausibly deniable way? Adorable. That's exactly what you and Lazenby have just done.

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
You sound like a certain group of mods from another place, telling one to suck up and suck it up. Ironic.
And where exactly does Lazenby's post suggest this?
Um, in the part I quoted?

Lazenby. wrote:
But I realise that this isn't all about me, and I appreciate just how much effort M has put into this place
I said what I said, where I said it, for a reason.

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
I know more about coding for phpBB than you and M combined.
Quite a sweeping statement, given that I've never once discussed my phpBB coding experience nor the level of it with either yourself nor anybody else on this forum.
Actions speak louder than words. You've customized nothing through template editing - I can see that. If you know CSS, why not zero in on details of the design? That'd be nice to see.

M wrote:
Right, first of all, is it helping a forum to succeed by trashing the work of and fabricating "brush-off" accusations towards an admin
I haven't done either of those things. Even if you feel that I have, you can't seriously say that I've hurt the forum, either. Will you only be addressing praise from now on, lest B&B suddenly heave and die? Didn't think so.

M wrote:
I've been nothing but polite to you, and you know it.
"Nothing but polite" - yeah, that about sums it up.

Maybe I'm a masochist. The more likely answer is that I prefer straightforward, no BS communication.

M wrote:
And you prefer honesty? Try showing me some mate, and stop lying your ass off about a non-existent "brush-off".
Not lying. I've been over this already.

M wrote:
And if we were "emotionally attached" to the look of the place, then why would things be changed regularly
I was referring to Lazenby's unnecessarily blistering defense of the board's design (the sole topic of my original post) and possible justification for it. But I think you know that. You're just refuting another argument that wasn't made.

M wrote:
Sure, the forum can be converted into a functioning phpBB3 forum with one click, but I suspect you know damn well that plenty of work still needs to be done
Your childish insinuation that I'm blowing it all out my ass when it comes to Forumotion does your point no justice. As a matter of fact, I don't know what needs to be done after the click. I've avoided phpBB3 - and understandably too, as functionality often takes a backseat to flash on that platform.

M wrote:
And the removal of the mod lists? Again, if you're so clued up on Forumotion, then you'd know that there's a very simple option which allows me to either display them or not to display them. Don't make out that things I do to "improve" the forum are done by accident as if I haven't a clue what I'm f***ing doing.
You seem to have missed something. I'll bold it for you.

Sleeper wrote:
That was because of the one-click upgrade to phpBB3. I suspect their removal from the front page wasn't intended then.
M wrote:
Lazenby referred to the mod names not being present for a time when the forum wasn't in phpBB3.
Really? Well, in that case I was simply misled by his habitual ambiguity. No big sin, and certainly no comment on your competence as an admin or graphic designer. Hypersensitivity seems to be the theme here.

M wrote:
When they're present, it's because I've chosen to display them. When they're not present, it means nothing more than I've clicked "no"
I know how simple most everything is. Thanks for the refresher?

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
Lazenby. wrote:
the thread descriptions (these were changed the other day slightly anyway IIRC)
In what way? Again, these were changed only with the temporary upgrade.
Again, if you knew so much about Forumotion, then you'd know that thread descriptions can't be automatically changed by the f***ing computer (???!!!!!). This isn't The Terminator. Stop trying to slight the work of people here. Louis Armstrong suggested some thread description changes the other week and they were acted upon.
You and Lazenby seem to be mistaking thread descriptions for forum descriptions (???!!!!!).

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
Lazenby. wrote:
Sharky's just pointed out a potential problem with Verdana which could leave M looking like a f*cktard
Yes, because James Page really looked like a fucktard for his use of it.
Is this the same James Page who refused to make changes for years over at MI6 Forums, regardless of what the members had to say, or how old the forum layout loooked? And the same who flushed everyone's hard work on those forums down the toilet without notice? And who's lost about 100 of his best members to Bond And Beyond because of the creation of a divisive new forum which paid no attention to what his previous forum members actually wanted from a forum? Still, I'm not here to talk about that.
My point (missed) was that the old MI6 used Verdana to very good effect.

I'm not comparing you to James Page, so I'm not sure what you're on about. I have no interest in discussing him.

Arial is literally a bastardization of Helvetica. But I guess you don't care. I wasn't even going to mention Verdana in my original post. But I did - and because of that, you and Lazenby (let's not pretend you haven't bought his kooky theory wholesale) have jumped on it as some sort of irrefutable evidence that I'm the Fabled Proboards Saboteur. Do you know how ridiculous that is? I suppose you haven't mentioned to him what I said to you via PM - that "font is a minor detail" - as cherry-picking my comments is downright essential to sticking your "evidence" on me.

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
Lazenby. wrote:
Being patient and civil about it won't kill anyone
My being a bit (understandably) snarky won't kill anyone either.
True, but it would make things a hell of a lot more tolerable and pleasant around here. Plus, it would save me from having to waste an hour of my time
We both could've saved even more time and effort had you just been forthcoming with me from the start. Like I said, I haven't a problem with you not liking my ideas. I'm a big boy. I can take criticism, harsh or otherwise... so long as it doesn't involve (time-wasting) conspiracy theories. And the whole tone - not to mention length - of this discussion would be vastly different had you not been more interested in saving face than learning why I felt brushed off.

M wrote:
This is a good old-fashioned forum in every sense of the term already.
Again... I never claimed otherwise. Some design elements simply don't complement it in my view. Like I said to you via PM, you've got a solid foundation.

M wrote:
Why have dated-looking stuff on the front page
I don't think you can look any more dated than a tiled background. But I digress.

M wrote:
Sleeper wrote:
And it'd be a grave underestimation of the community to think that people will stick around for big shiny buttons and frivolous features; if they do, they're being attracted for the wrong reasons.
Nobody comes here for those reasons anyway,
Good to see you've realized that. I'd guess this was a fairly recent revelation for you, considering your last temporary tinkerings with the layout (and what you've said to me via PM about "competition").

M wrote:
but it still doesn't give any even remotely fathomable justification to making the forum look old and outdated.
I'm not a fan of tact obstructing honesty, so I'm glad to finally know what you think of my ideas (ie. "dull and outdated", so atrocious that you suspected covert sabotage of the community). Even a simple "that's not what I had in mind" would have sufficed - maybe your own vision for me to work with. I wanted to be your layout guy. I wanted to correspond with you and design something together. But no; at the first sign of us not seeing eye to eye, you basically tell me to leave you alone until further notice instead of acknowledging a simple difference of opinion. You made no attempt to explain why you didn't like my ideas - your sudden disinterest couldn't have been more palpable.

M wrote:
Only someone without the best interests of the forum at heart would think otherwise.
There's that conspiracy theory again, upon which Lazenby so deliciously expounded. Pass me one of those tin hats won't you?

M wrote:
It's just too difficult to please every single member at once
I would never ask, expect or advise you to try.

Not sure why you bolded this bit in your post, as if all I'm getting at is "please use my ideas". I felt brushed off, and chose to respond the way I did. Hope you can respect that.

M wrote:
I hope you understand that I had to respond to all this, as I never intentionally brushed you off at all.
Considering you were looking to end communication without actually saying so, I have a hard time believing that.

M wrote:
I hope we can simply move on from this
I don't exactly sustain myself on drama so, if anyone's found this discussion at all toxic, rest assured that it's over from this side. I'll haul my "lying ass" out of here. I'm glad we could have some honest dialogue out in the open, M. Best of luck with the board.

"One moment, there is one more..."

Lazenby:

Unlike GeneralGogol (and many others), I find this layout unattractive. I wouldn't have registered let alone posted here were it not for my enjoyment of some members. Would it be possible to display a modicum of maturity and accept my opinion without slapping a bunch of silly tin-hat theories on me? Maybe you feel threatened by the fact that I've defended myself a bit venomously. It's been justified. Please don't shove your paranoia about "competition" or your obsession with (and regret over?) MI6 on me.

As for this: http://themi6forum.proboards.com/index.cgi ...

Lazenby. wrote:
Whether the forum linked above was set up quickly and economically in our wake with a view to undoing all of the hard work done here by snaring members away and cashing in on our success is open to speculation,
And whether you're having way too much fun with all this Spy Kids nonsense is also open to speculation.

I mean, "cashing in on our success"? What the hell?

Lazenby. wrote:
but what's most revealing about MI6 ProBoards is the presence on their "good old-fashioned forum" of a very "clean and simple" layout, full-width screen, Verdana font, the use of the old MI6 banner and remarkably familiar topic descriptions similar to descriptions being suggested for use here very recently.
I'm curious to know where I've expressed an interest in using the old MI6 banner. But yes, all very cute coincidences.

Lazenby. wrote:
Not to mention they have their very own "M" in the admin role.
Not to mention it's the first thing that comes to mind for the admin of a Bond forum. Uninspired work there Nancy Drew.

Lazenby. wrote:
It's also no surprise to find that no key members from our forum were invited over to MI6 ProBoards
Maybe that's because it's not in competition with this place. What do you think?

Lazenby. wrote:
The ProBoards forum was obviously created by somebody familiar with MI6, so the odds are good that many of the members here would be known to it's creator, which would suggest that stealthier tactics would be required
Your theory falters under its own stupidity. I was registered at MI6 for only a couple months before the Event, during which time I made less than 40 posts. Do you remember me? I knew a few people, but nobody knew me. So what's your point about "stealth tactics" again?

Lazenby. wrote:
I figure it's best to put all of this information out there before people start potentially accusing or suspecting possibly the wrong people.
It's too late for that buddy.

And you've offered up no "information" - only wild speculation. Diluting your post with qualifiers and hypotheticals doesn't change how offensive you've been.

Lazenby. wrote:
I'll forgo replying to the posts further up the page
Does that mean you'll forgo responding again, and instead post another cute conspiracy theory? Can hardly wait.

Lazenby. wrote:
Probably better to concentrate on getting shut of potentially malicious puppet members, while hopefully simultaneously removing the cretin who tried to land us in it with Forumotion.
Like I said in another thread, it's certainly preferable to pointing fingers. Maybe this time you'll think about that.

Looks like you've been waiting on pins and needles for this supposed "cretin" to show his face. If you think you've found him, enjoy yourself. Maybe now we can move on from these childish backroom antics. I mean, a pecking order's clearly been established on this board. And I can only laugh at the irony of that. Why else would you theorize trash about me behind my back? For someone so eager to have this place seen as a friendly alternative to (not a competitor with) MI6, you're sure paranoid about competition of our own. Paranoid enough to build a conspiracy theory around a measly dead-in-the-water MI6 offshoot (which has every right to exist, by the way) and then pin it on the first guy here to voice notable discontent. Get a grip.

And the private agony shared between you and M (relayed to me via PM) over the possibility of MI6 upgrading to a shiny new forum that'll draw members away like demented crows is an insult to the taste, discretion, and maturity of this community.

I'm glad though that you finally laid your cards on the table (even if you're playing Go Fish).

May as well post it, I'd be a fool to think the brass was interested:

http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/2552/layout0001.jpg
http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/7938/layout0002.jpg
http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/3146/layout0003.jpg

The keen observer will notice this test board was created on March 15 - that's how long ago I'd begun on my ideas. My proposition wasn't a case of take it or leave it, either. I wanted feedback. Instead I got "nothing but polite"... and then some. I sincerely offered my help - a display of vested interest in B&B's success - and the reply's been polite insincerity from the admin plus the slimy suggestion by his mate that I'm the mastermind of some imaginary scheme to destroy this place from the inside. Is my being annoyed so inconceivable that all you can think to do is call me out for something that didn't even happen?

This was my first post here:

Sleeper wrote:
This is LA's brother... looking forward to helping this place get on its feet.
Helping with the layout is mainly what I had in mind.

You think I designed MI6 Proboards, Lazenby? Credit me with some taste. If you and M think the design I made is poor, that's fine. But don't accuse me of trying to destroy the community just because you don't like it. You think I wanted to make this place look bad? You two really don't need my help. You've been a fucking comedy act.


Last edited by Sleeper on Sat Mar 17, 2012 8:00 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
Lazenby.
Chief Executive
Chief Executive
avatar

Posts : 1268
Member Since : 2010-04-15
Location : 1969

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:01 pm

Okay, well I'd guess that M will probably want to reply to all that, but (and I hope I'm not alone on this) I really think all of this needs ironing out once and for all, as it's doing nobody any good except for the f***er who complained to Forumotion. I've made an apology for my own actions in the relevant thread, but there's still debate here as to what's happened, how it happened, who's right and who's wrong, who said what, who implied what, etc so, in the interests of putting this whole debacle to sleep, I'll try to put into a very small nutshell what may have happened here and see if we can all just agree to move on?

1. Sleeper and M are discussing ideas for the forum layout.

2. M tells Sleeper he'll get back to him when he's finished adding his own contributions to Sleeper's ideas.

3. M makes a few touch-ups to the forum "for the forseeable future", which creates crossed wires (?) between M and Sleeper. Sleeper takes this as a "brush-off", which doesn't look entirely intentional due to the use of the word "forseeable" as, from what I understand, M was listening to Sleeper's ideas with a view to creating the future look for the forum, not the stop-gap "forseeable future" touch-ups M made (probably in light of some members wanting the forum returned to something close to it's original set-up).

4. Sleeper makes the "bitch about the layout" post in the wake of what either just looks like crossed wires or not enough communication, perhaps Sleeper sees M's minor meantime touch-ups as a complete rejection of his own ideas for the future of the forum.

5. Things get blown out of all proportion over what was probably just a misunderstanding or, at worst, just a lack of communication to begin with. I, for one, take issue with Sleeper's tone in the "bitch" thread and, coupled with the coincidence of Sleeper's "bitch" post being submitted on the same date as the complaints to Forumotion and a few similarities between Sleeper's ideas and the layout of MI6 ProBoards, jump to a few unprovable conclusions.

6. Suspicion, arguments and accusations start turning up on the boards, probably making whoever did try and complain to Forumotion a very happy man.


If the above is even remotely close to what's happened here (a misunderstanding which completely snowballed?), then can we just try and move on? At the end of the day, this whole thing has came about simply through a few people only wanting what they thought was best for the forum. Obviously people will have different ideas about what "best" means in this context, but that's just life. Diffferent people often want different things, that's just the way it goes sometimes.

I've made my apologies for my part, and I'm not interested in dragging this out by going through the post above piece-by-piece as this will just keep the whole thing going around in circles, which nobody here needs. Can we all agree to knock it on the head?


Back to top Go down
Largo's Shark
Moderator
Moderator


Posts : 10600
Member Since : 2011-03-14

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Fri Sep 16, 2011 11:35 am



I like the current background. Soothing.
Back to top Go down
M
Administrator
Administrator
avatar

Posts : 536
Member Since : 2010-01-12

PostSubject: Re: The layout.   Fri Sep 16, 2011 11:42 am

Thanks Sharky. I think it works okay, so i'll just wait and see if there are any noteworthy objections to it.
Back to top Go down
http://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: The layout.   

Back to top Go down
 
The layout.
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 4Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Bond And Beyond :: Beyond :: General Discussion-
Jump to: