46
   

Lola at the Coffee House

 
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 02:49 pm
@Sturgis,
I believe the old format was a creation of the Administrator, the one we have now is out of the box. It requires little or no administrator time (at least, less time). Also, there is not nearly as much parenting done on the version. The Abuzz format was heavily administer and no one wanted that kind of parenting. Anyways, there are whole threads that talk about these issues.......
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 03:01 pm
@Sturgis,
Oh yeah, his name (the administrator) is Craven de Kere, plus a few others.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 03:04 pm
@Sturgis,
I have also noticed that there don't seem to be any gatherings anymore.....
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 03:05 pm
@Sturgis,
I also miss Dano and PDiddle (BTW, I am also bumping Wink)
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 03:12 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You've been around here about the same length of time I have, spendi. Do you remember how confused we all were when the new format was introduced? I think I became so frustrated, trying to find anything, I disappeared from the site for quite a while.


I can't say I was confused ff. I don't like change all that much although I had always preached to anybody who would listen that they should get used to change. I have had four distinctly different occupations leaving out a spell in the military, which took me to at least 10 middle-east countries. I got through the very sudden change from being coddled by a doting Mother to being shouted at by a Seargant Major for something I didn't know I had done, or could help doing, easily enough. I knew he was only kidding.

I made some representations to Robert but really I ought to have known better. I thought Ignore a diabolical change and the Thumbs only slightly less so. Now I find them amusing.

What did confuse me from the outset was a pronounced propensity to rely on unsupported assertions in argument ( argumentun proboscis) which I couldn't understand until I read Evelyn Waugh's and Aldous Huxley's remarks about American social life in the higher circles.

The change of format didn't augur any changes in that direction.

I'm no longer confused on the matter.

I soon got used to it. Once I found Trivia I was in my element. I really am quite trivial. I don't know the cause of that but it might have been that I noticed that people who took things seriously had funny ways. Not flat-out barmy but above the mid-point on the scale sort of thing.

I saw Trivia, from the first, as a method of encrypting some propaganda (sic) on behalf of the Widow Wadmans of this world to counteract the stick insect image which I found only slightly better than shagging a skeleton. Only my youthful vigour enabled me to cope with scrawny thighs which extend to the waist. What a terrible thing mini-skirts were to ladies like that.

There is a tendency when reading Mansfield Park to imagine all the young ladies having great legs but if you watch Royal Ascot on TV you will see a long parade of ladies legs which, assuming few changes in that regard since 1800, provides a more realistic approach. I chose my idea of Fanny Price's legs during today's programme.

From a friendliness point of view the format revision made no noticeable difference to me. But I still miss Clary. She hated the change as much as you did and when I made my submissions to Robert it was more on your behalfs than from my own. And, anyway, aggravating him is much more fun than telling him what a good bloke he is. Really good blokes hate being reminded that they are good blokes.

I don't think you are a nostalgic old fool at all and I think you know that. I absolutely deplored what DSK had done in the Sofitel but I thought you were making far too much of what, after all, was a very trivial incident, however vulgar. I knew exactly what Media was up to.

Did you see my post on the Brit thread today?

I thought I would do a longish post to recognise the longest day.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 03:18 pm
@firefly,
As an exercise, ff, see how many assertions you can find in fm's response.

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 03:40 pm
@spendius,
I still miss Clary too.

I don't even know how to find the British thread. And that's an example of what I mean about the format and layout now. It's hard to know what threads are hidden all over this site--even currently active threads. I'm sure there are many things I might enjoy reading here, if I even knew they existed.
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 03:54 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

I still miss Clary too.

I don't even know how to find the British thread. And that's an example of what I mean about the format and layout now. It's hard to know what threads are hidden all over this site--even currently active threads. I'm sure there are many things I might enjoy reading here, if I even knew they existed.


I am not great at it either, but I get lucky when I try to conquer things one at a time. Now, sometimes I get what I want; but, get stuck and don't know how to get out. When this happens, I just close it all down and start over.

OK, to get the the British Thread, up in the right hand corner is:
BiIIW::Inbox::Log Out::Search

Click on Search, type in "British Thread", and click on Search>> Wink

Select one of the post, go to it, then go to the last page of the thread to enter a post (or, you can just enter a post on any ole page).
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 04:00 pm
@BillW,
what has happened to jespah? She was kinda the administrator in charge the last time I made frequent stops to this blog.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 04:03 pm
@firefly,
.
Quote:
I don't even know how to find the British thread.


It also worked for me to type British Thread into Forum Search too.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 04:14 pm
@firefly,
See the word search at the top of the page in the dark blue strip, to the far right?
Insert the words British Thread in the space that shows up after you click search.

Alternately, see the words Search Forums on the right? Insert the word British in the space, and the second underlined word that shows up will be British. Click on that, and you'll see the British Thread II.


The top search is a google search that deals only with a2k.
The lower search forums is a show of tags - which is why tagging threads is important.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 04:38 pm
I know how to use the search feature. That's not my problem.

I can't search for threads I'm unaware even exist. And there are lots of currently active threads on this site I have no way of knowing about, unless I somehow stumble on them accidently-s-as happened when I found Joe(interesting guy)Nation's thread recently.

This site really isn't user-friendly when it comes to giving you an overall view of even the currently active threads on the board--there are many I don't know about. That's due to the way this place is organized...or disorganized.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 04:43 pm
@firefly,
You said you didn't know how to find the British thread.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 04:55 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
our street of Strsburg


I presume Strasburg was meant. I Googled the place.

The main attractions were listed as
1--Fulton Steamboat Inn.
2--The Red Caboose.
3--The Limestone Inn.
4--Starsburg Village Inn.
5--Hershey Farm Restaurant & Inn.
6--Beaver Creek Farm Cabins.
7--Dutch Treat Motel. (what's a Dutch treat?--a finger in the dyke!!)
8--Whiteoak Bed & Breakfast.
9--Carriage House Inn.
10-Clarion Inn at Historic. ( 2 Queen beds@ $175 a nite).

Is there not a "Ye Olde Mobile Phone Shoppe?

Science doesn't look to be very popular.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 04:59 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
I'm now bumping into the same handful of people in thread after thread, as though there really aren't many folks hanging around here. That alone can make the place less interesting.


It ought to make it more interesting.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 05:09 pm
@ossobuco,
Quote:
Click on that, and you'll see the British Thread II.


British Thread I was blocked in mysterious circumstances.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 05:10 pm
@ossobuco,
Quote:
You said you didn't know how to find the British thread.

I'm sorry, that wasn't exactly what I meant. I know how to search.

I was really responding to spendi's question about whether I had seen his post in the British thread. How should I know that thread--or other threads--even exist? How would I even know spendi had posted there? It's impossible to just look at this board and get an idea of all the currently active, or recently active. threads. That's what I find frustrating. It wasn't that way when I joined A2K. It was easy to see all the threads.

But I genuinely appreciate the search help that you and Bill offered me, and the time you both took to do that.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 05:10 pm
@spendius,
Hmmm. Also, ah.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 05:17 pm
@ossobuco,
I think you will find osso that the blocking of Brit Thread I involved the same lack of openness and transparency which was the subject of my post on Brit Thread II earlier today.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jun, 2013 05:19 pm
@firefly,
If you said to yourself, ff, "I wonder what spendi is up to" you could just click my UN on top of every post and there you are.
 

Related Topics

JIM NABORS WAS GOY? - Question by farmerman
Adding Tags to Threads - Discussion by Brandon9000
LOST & MISPLACED A2K people. - Discussion by msolga
Merry Andrew - Discussion by edgarblythe
Spot the April Fools gag yet? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Great New Look to A2K- Applause, Robert! - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Head count - Discussion by CalamityJane
New A2K feature requests. - Discussion by DrewDad
The great migration - Discussion by shewolfnm
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 11/26/2024 at 04:36:22