Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Memorial to the BBS

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by K on March 20, 2004 at 17:22:24:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Memorial to the BBS posted by Ron on March 20, 2004 at 15:34:48:

"The old board is much easier to follow for my needs."

This is not just a matter of your needs! This BBS is organised like the human brain, when it comes to the development of thoughts and ideas: by immediate association.

Of course there is much more to a good brain than immediate association, but these extra elements are not prohibited by the structure of this present BBS.

The problem with the structure of the PDQUCING format, allegedly the successor of the fine TubeNet named board, is, that it cuts out the basic element of human development of thoughts: the immediate association!

Like others I am Sean, Farah, and, within the last 8 months, also Sampson immensely grateful for the personal sacrifices of theirs upon which we all have been able to enjoy the immense benefits of the present TubeNet format.

As a subscriber to several other music related web-forums it is my experience, that the more bigotry is an element in management of a given forum, the less input it gets from posters able to tell something worth reading. They end up with Ted Smalltown reporting on his fishing experiences with Jim Villager at the Dead Pond fed by the Fishless Creek. Just because a word like "pollution" triggers a blue screen with all the list managers.

Sean has been much more liberal in that respect, even if he has pulled threads for hardly justifiable reasons.

I see a few reasons, among others, for the intended shift of format:

the repeated attacks on Seans person from braindead inmates of some educational institutions, where the wardens are not aware of the responsibilities they draw upon themselves, when they provide free internet access to these less equipped inmates

the computer tech and military environments Sean has had to suffer (these tend to crumble vitality of mind unless one at will diminishes their influence. Does Sean really have an in-depth understanding of the value of the present board format? The new pre-stone-age format will sort out those acting on the frontiers and promote those confirming to the lowest common denominator)

an unbearable financial burden on the Chisham household (I am in for a subscription fee, as long as I can use my VISA card without any funny intermediary steps)

the frustration of bearing the costs of a board, which others use to make profits ( I can understand that, especially as my experiences with TubeNet-posting vendors have been at best mixed. Only one, no not on the Nile, out of three has delivered honestly, and that repeatedly, so far)


who HAS signed up with the PDQUCING format, and
who in case of the SAD demise of the original TUBENET format will use the PDQUCING format for the occasional announcement of uploads to his FREE music and gallery pages, but hardly for anything else

Just to illustrate the inherent idiocy of the PDQUCING format:

I subscribe to the function sending an e-mail, when somebody replies to a posting of mine.

When I got a such ALLERT-YOU-MAIL I of course followed the link provided.

What I was linked to, merely was the next mail in the diversified thread. It really was a reply to our revered BOARD-owner, who hopefully will not transform himself into the role of board-DOWNER.

Follow Ups: