The future of 606
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
The future of 606
Although my road to TW started on 606 a couple of years back I very seldom venture across there these days.
With the greatest respect to the 606ers now, the loss of many of the 'original' Bolton contributors from 606 to initially Bolton Banter and latterly a second 'defection' to here as left the 606 site open to an endless stream of Wind up Merchants and text speakers.
This combined with the 606 forum always seeming to be crashing and the decreasing limit on posting hours virtually ended my interest in the site altogether.
However I noticed today a new member to our forum has quoted that they have joined us as yet again 606 is going through another change and I accordingly have had a look at what is going on over there and print below what is happening.
The reason why I comment on this now is that it appears to me that 606 will no longer be allowing chat about Bolton Wanderers (or any other club) from next week onwards - until the start of the new season. Even then only Moderators will be allowed to start threads (I hope that doesn't give our mods any ideas!!!)
606 acknowledge that this may well not be popular with many fans and have thus will allow other Forums to publish their respective site links.
It occurred to me that 606 is still a very good place for any genuine Bolton supporter to start to seek informed discussion on BWFC and wondered if somehow we could establish a permanent link from 606 to TW to help others find us?
I know that this may also advertise us to WUM's also but I think any WUM's would soon tire of us and seek their 'thrill's' elsewhere.
The 606 changes are reported below -
Hello,
A big thank you for your patience and loyalty during recent months. As you know, the team have been working hard to work out the best way to move the 606 message boards forward in the future and we are now in a position to share our plans with you.
Changes to 606
The future:
We have identified some principle aims and objectives:
• To provide a richer, more in-depth user experience
• To raise the standard of contributions
• To reduce the amount of ephemeral, low-quality chat
• To make 606 more distinctive
• Raise expectations of users and of content
Next season, the 606 format will change and will feature a number of different types of high-quality content – users can submit match reports, articles, and team/player profiles, as well as debate the latest football.
We also have plans for personal pages for users plus, in time, enhanced privileges for trusted users, members’ journals, and many more. We also want to have better links with the 606 radio show. More details on this as these ideas develop but please tell us here what you want to see too.
We have more immediate plans for the World Cup.
What will we offer during the World Cup?
While we continue to develop a much-improved product for next season we still need to produce a service during the tournament which is more suited to events in Germany.
We’re delighted to say 606 will revert to longer opening hours. Every day during the World Cup we’ll open at 10am and close at 11pm.
There will be three main topics:
• World Cup – for general debate around the tournament
• World Cup city guides - for people to share information about venues and stadiums
• Transfers – for domestic football
We are planning for the new topics to be in place later this week. Many 606 members will be unhappy at the loss of their team’s or division’s topic and we’re especially sorry for those supporters of the teams promoted to the Premiership who are looking forward to having their own board.
However it’s clear to us and to many users of the boards that the structure creates an antagonistic atmosphere that plays into the hands of the “wind-up merchants”. For those of you still seeking a more team-based experience we will continue to allow people to publish links to other sites.
Another major change will be that only hosts will start threads. We hope this will create a better quality of debate and content and avoid off-topic conversations.
We promise there will be no shortage of discussion – with pages for every match, story and all the latest talking points. While users won’t be able to start a thread you will be able to suggest a discussion via a postform on the site and we will publish as many of the high quality suggestions as possible. This feedback will be very important to us and will also mean our journalists can see what you want to talk about more easily.
The short delay between posts introduced last week, whereby users can only post within three minutes of their last contribution, will remain.
Finally we also have another change planned in a few days which we expect will more effectively target repeat troublemakers.
Why we have to change?
We have not taken these decisions lightly. They come after various attempts to try to address some of the problems in recent months. The opening hours were reduced. We urged users to limit off-topic and overly long threads, and to help us deal with troublemakers. More recently, we introduced a gap of five and then three minutes in between users’ posts to try to improve the quality of debate.
Some of these have helped to some extent but the 606 message boards are simply not sustainable in their present format and neither do we believe they provide the best solution for interactivity and "high quality football debate". Like the rest of the BBC, be it television, radio, news or elsewhere - we also want to provide a distinctive, high-quality service.
The boards’ massive growth over the last three years is now presenting problems, not just of performance, but of financial viability and quality.
We understand that an online community evolves over time, and many users want to discuss things other than football with the fellow fans with whom they have built relationships over time. But the boards have strayed from the initial intention – providing football fans with a space for high-quality football debate - and we can no longer justify their existence in the present form. We will happily facilitate users publishing links to any online communities outside the BBC which pass our editorial guidelines.
We’re very excited about our plans for the future, and firmly believe we can provide a better alternative to 606 as we know it. We really hope you share our optimism that the new boards will offer you a much better all-round experience than they currently do, and would greatly value your feedback. We will monitor your responses and suggestions. You can also provide feedback on the message board. We will, of course, keep you posted about any further developments.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb606/F2241564?thread=3090178
With the greatest respect to the 606ers now, the loss of many of the 'original' Bolton contributors from 606 to initially Bolton Banter and latterly a second 'defection' to here as left the 606 site open to an endless stream of Wind up Merchants and text speakers.
This combined with the 606 forum always seeming to be crashing and the decreasing limit on posting hours virtually ended my interest in the site altogether.
However I noticed today a new member to our forum has quoted that they have joined us as yet again 606 is going through another change and I accordingly have had a look at what is going on over there and print below what is happening.
The reason why I comment on this now is that it appears to me that 606 will no longer be allowing chat about Bolton Wanderers (or any other club) from next week onwards - until the start of the new season. Even then only Moderators will be allowed to start threads (I hope that doesn't give our mods any ideas!!!)
606 acknowledge that this may well not be popular with many fans and have thus will allow other Forums to publish their respective site links.
It occurred to me that 606 is still a very good place for any genuine Bolton supporter to start to seek informed discussion on BWFC and wondered if somehow we could establish a permanent link from 606 to TW to help others find us?
I know that this may also advertise us to WUM's also but I think any WUM's would soon tire of us and seek their 'thrill's' elsewhere.
The 606 changes are reported below -
Hello,
A big thank you for your patience and loyalty during recent months. As you know, the team have been working hard to work out the best way to move the 606 message boards forward in the future and we are now in a position to share our plans with you.
Changes to 606
The future:
We have identified some principle aims and objectives:
• To provide a richer, more in-depth user experience
• To raise the standard of contributions
• To reduce the amount of ephemeral, low-quality chat
• To make 606 more distinctive
• Raise expectations of users and of content
Next season, the 606 format will change and will feature a number of different types of high-quality content – users can submit match reports, articles, and team/player profiles, as well as debate the latest football.
We also have plans for personal pages for users plus, in time, enhanced privileges for trusted users, members’ journals, and many more. We also want to have better links with the 606 radio show. More details on this as these ideas develop but please tell us here what you want to see too.
We have more immediate plans for the World Cup.
What will we offer during the World Cup?
While we continue to develop a much-improved product for next season we still need to produce a service during the tournament which is more suited to events in Germany.
We’re delighted to say 606 will revert to longer opening hours. Every day during the World Cup we’ll open at 10am and close at 11pm.
There will be three main topics:
• World Cup – for general debate around the tournament
• World Cup city guides - for people to share information about venues and stadiums
• Transfers – for domestic football
We are planning for the new topics to be in place later this week. Many 606 members will be unhappy at the loss of their team’s or division’s topic and we’re especially sorry for those supporters of the teams promoted to the Premiership who are looking forward to having their own board.
However it’s clear to us and to many users of the boards that the structure creates an antagonistic atmosphere that plays into the hands of the “wind-up merchants”. For those of you still seeking a more team-based experience we will continue to allow people to publish links to other sites.
Another major change will be that only hosts will start threads. We hope this will create a better quality of debate and content and avoid off-topic conversations.
We promise there will be no shortage of discussion – with pages for every match, story and all the latest talking points. While users won’t be able to start a thread you will be able to suggest a discussion via a postform on the site and we will publish as many of the high quality suggestions as possible. This feedback will be very important to us and will also mean our journalists can see what you want to talk about more easily.
The short delay between posts introduced last week, whereby users can only post within three minutes of their last contribution, will remain.
Finally we also have another change planned in a few days which we expect will more effectively target repeat troublemakers.
Why we have to change?
We have not taken these decisions lightly. They come after various attempts to try to address some of the problems in recent months. The opening hours were reduced. We urged users to limit off-topic and overly long threads, and to help us deal with troublemakers. More recently, we introduced a gap of five and then three minutes in between users’ posts to try to improve the quality of debate.
Some of these have helped to some extent but the 606 message boards are simply not sustainable in their present format and neither do we believe they provide the best solution for interactivity and "high quality football debate". Like the rest of the BBC, be it television, radio, news or elsewhere - we also want to provide a distinctive, high-quality service.
The boards’ massive growth over the last three years is now presenting problems, not just of performance, but of financial viability and quality.
We understand that an online community evolves over time, and many users want to discuss things other than football with the fellow fans with whom they have built relationships over time. But the boards have strayed from the initial intention – providing football fans with a space for high-quality football debate - and we can no longer justify their existence in the present form. We will happily facilitate users publishing links to any online communities outside the BBC which pass our editorial guidelines.
We’re very excited about our plans for the future, and firmly believe we can provide a better alternative to 606 as we know it. We really hope you share our optimism that the new boards will offer you a much better all-round experience than they currently do, and would greatly value your feedback. We will monitor your responses and suggestions. You can also provide feedback on the message board. We will, of course, keep you posted about any further developments.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb606/F2241564?thread=3090178
Last edited by sluffy on Wed May 31, 2006 1:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Backgammon
- Promising
- Posts: 333
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:07 am
- Location: In the fetal position
It's a real shame that 606 will change so much. For a lot of us it was the first site that we used to post football opinions.
The changes sound a bit radical, especially with the moderates being the only users that can start threads. I think they'll find that if they start a thread on a certain subject, it will get highjacked by posters wanting to talk about something else because there is no dedicated thread for their subject. It will 'bottle neck' the thousands of users they have into a few threads. Chaos.
The changes sound a bit radical, especially with the moderates being the only users that can start threads. I think they'll find that if they start a thread on a certain subject, it will get highjacked by posters wanting to talk about something else because there is no dedicated thread for their subject. It will 'bottle neck' the thousands of users they have into a few threads. Chaos.
-
warthog
- Passionate
- Posts: 2378
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 4:16 pm
- Location: Nearer to Ewood Park than I like
The changes were bound to happen. There’s been widespread abuse of the system and the Beeb’s servers (which haven’t been in place long) can’t cope with the volume of traffic. There will be a facility where users can suggest thread topics to the mods, so it isn’t quite as draconian as it looks at first.
One ex-member of these boards will probably have a nervous breakdown when she finds out about it. I’ll miss torturing West Ham fans. Maybe I’ll sign up to KUMB.
One ex-member of these boards will probably have a nervous breakdown when she finds out about it. I’ll miss torturing West Ham fans. Maybe I’ll sign up to KUMB.
-
Electric Gretar
- Hopeful
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:41 pm
*HE*warthog wrote:The changes were bound to happen. There’s been widespread abuse of the system and the Beeb’s servers (which haven’t been in place long) can’t cope with the volume of traffic. There will be a facility where users can suggest thread topics to the mods, so it isn’t quite as draconian as it looks at first.
One ex-member of these boards will probably have a nervous breakdown when she finds out about it. I’ll miss torturing West Ham fans. Maybe I’ll sign up to KUMB.
-
Barry Siddall's Sideburns
- Hopeful
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:38 am
- Location: West Stand, Upper
Maybe Ratbert will be going off on his own - just spotted this site !!!
http://www.reallifenews.com/football/bolton/
http://www.reallifenews.com/football/bolton/
BSS
It's Not Where You Are; It's Where You're At.
It's Not Where You Are; It's Where You're At.
He has had that site address on his signiture for quite a while now - so I don't think Ratty will be leaving us just yet.Barry Siddall's Sideburns wrote:Maybe Ratbert will be going off on his own - just spotted this site !!!
http://www.reallifenews.com/football/bolton/
What a complete cock up the BBC have made of the 606 forum!!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb606/F4441084?thread=3111041
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb606/F4441084?thread=3111041
-
Soldier_Of_The_White_Army
- Legend
- Posts: 7042
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:36 am
- Location: HULL, BABY!
- Contact:
All the better for ussluffy wrote:What a complete cock up the BBC have made of the 606 forum!!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb606/F4441084?thread=3111041
YOU CLIMB OBSTACLES LIKE OLD PEOPLE FXCK!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Zulus Thousand of em
- Icon
- Posts: 5043
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 9:58 am
- Location: 200 miles darn sarf
-
Batman
, so i registered on 606 and it is piss poor, and now has got worse. Though Natasha cheers me up, she/he is a comedic writer of the highest order.
-
TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43222
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
-
Montreal Wanderer
- Immortal
- Posts: 12940
- Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
- Location: Montreal, Canada
I certainly never objected to Natasha - although a WUM, she had a certain style and never descended to vulgarities (except when she called me a Stupid Canadian Muppet, of course). She was banned from BB for making threats through the PM feature (she claimed that she had left her workstation on and her secretary had sent the emails, yeah - nice try). However, I've always wondered a bit about it since the person who turned her in - the recipient - was Mich, and they later formed a mutual admiration society on other sites. It didn't make any sense to me. However, since we are dealing with two individuals whose contact with reality seems somewhat tangental, perhaps it is not supposed to make sense. I can't remember why she was banned from TW. Maybe, if it was not too heinous a crime, she will return, Batty.Batman wrote: so i registered on 606 and it is piss poor, and now has got worse. Though Natasha cheers me up, she/he is a comedic writer of the highest order.
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.
-
Soldier_Of_The_White_Army
- Legend
- Posts: 7042
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:36 am
- Location: HULL, BABY!
- Contact:
Naaa!! She's only upset because someone dropped a house on her sister!!Montreal Wanderer wrote:I certainly never objected to Natasha - although a WUM, she had a certain style and never descended to vulgarities (except when she called me a Stupid Canadian Muppet, of course). She was banned from BB for making threats through the PM feature (she claimed that she had left her workstation on and her secretary had sent the emails, yeah - nice try). However, I've always wondered a bit about it since the person who turned her in - the recipient - was Mich, and they later formed a mutual admiration society on other sites. It didn't make any sense to me. However, since we are dealing with two individuals whose contact with reality seems somewhat tangental, perhaps it is not supposed to make sense. I can't remember why she was banned from TW. Maybe, if it was not too heinous a crime, she will return, Batty.Batman wrote: so i registered on 606 and it is piss poor, and now has got worse. Though Natasha cheers me up, she/he is a comedic writer of the highest order.
YOU CLIMB OBSTACLES LIKE OLD PEOPLE FXCK!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Montreal Wanderer
- Immortal
- Posts: 12940
- Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
- Location: Montreal, Canada
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 182 guests