Goodbye to Finalfurlong forum

icebreaker said:
I think that a person who has been such a stalwart member on FF for so long might feel sad at its demise, and should be allowed comment that might be otherwise construed as intemperate. FF going is like the death of a dependable old friend to quite a few of us.
Click to expand...

I realise that, which is why I subsequently qualified it rather than just laughing at the idea. I had a few email exchanges with Ted after I'd finished with the place, and he was under no illusions as to its direction of travel with or without me. In any event, it had plenty of time to pull itself round and clearly hasn't done
 
It's hardly thriving, Slim. There are some form student comments, but you couldn't exactly call it thriving. However, I personally believe an ideal racing forum should be private and have no more than a dozen members (even thats probably too many), no general chat area, so it's more of a casual office environment for like minded people. A situation where peoples contributions complement other members from differing angles of approach.

That notion seems absurd to Admins in general, where the belief that bigger is better rules supreme.
 
SlimChance said:
His sentiment is valid. It was a **** site with no meaningful contributions. This place thrives because it's backbone is people debating the merits of the formbook and betting.
Click to expand...

Luke, Thank you

Slim, I fail to see how that makes the ex members of Atacanta ****s
 
CPGagie said:
It's hardly thriving, Slim. There are some form student comments, but you couldn't exactly call it thriving. However, I personally believe an ideal racing forum should be private and have no more than a dozen members (even thats probably too many), no general chat area, so it's more of a casual office environment for like minded people. A situation where peoples contributions complement other members from differing angles of approach.

That notion seems absurd to Admins in general, where the belief that bigger is better rules supreme.
Click to expand...

That's achieved on here by interacting with the people who are worth listening too. If you post a question on here you'll get a reply and probably the correct answer. If I want a million **** opinions I'll log on to Twitter.
 
CPGagie said:
It's hardly thriving, Slim. There are some form student comments, but you couldn't exactly call it thriving. However, I personally believe an ideal racing forum should be private and have no more than a dozen members (even thats probably too many), no general chat area, so it's more of a casual office environment for like minded people. A situation where peoples contributions complement other members from differing angles of approach.

That notion seems absurd to Admins in general, where the belief that bigger is better rules supreme.
Click to expand...

A forum wouldn't survive with a dozen members, and when the content is private then no one can read it so you never get new members. I believe more the better as then you get a wide range of views, I'm not sure a forum would work with only a few members.
 
CPGagie said:
It's hardly thriving, Slim. There are some form student comments, but you couldn't exactly call it thriving. However, I personally believe an ideal racing forum should be private and have no more than a dozen members (even thats probably too many), no general chat area, so it's more of a casual office environment for like minded people. A situation where peoples contributions complement other members from differing angles of approach.

That notion seems absurd to Admins in general, where the belief that bigger is better rules supreme.
Click to expand...



I believe the the last few weeks have seen plenty of robust and vigorous debate-it's always going to be busier pre Cheltenham but I think the last few weeks have been good for the forum.
 
TH is in the sweet-spot as forums go.

It has just about the right amount of regular posters, and most all of them are opinionated gits, which pretty-much guarantees robust and interesting discourse. If a forum gets beyond a certain point in terms of volume, it leads either to repetition or to threads which are impossible to follow - which was where TRF was, around the time I stopped posting there.
 
Last edited:
Final Furlong and Atacanta suffered from the backslapping fallacy. Someone posts something (literally anything) and everyone agrees or posts a big thumbs up emoticon. I quite like it when people on here point out what a **** I am.
 
Last edited:
Yes, there's a refreshing honesty on this forum, backed up with some worldly opinion. I always had a passing interest in racing but this forum demands that if you want to contribute, you should know enough to make a meaningful contribution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
SlimChance said:
Final Furlong and Atacanta suffered from the backslapping fallacy. Someone posts something (literally anything) and every agrees or posts a big thumbs up emoticon. I quite like it when people on here point out what a **** I am.
Click to expand...

Like it when they talk dirty. Curtains drawn . iPad in left hand. Right hand....
 
Luke, I can't say I've noticed a change, but to be fair, I don't look in all that often (tends to be in small waves) and never look at NH content threads (other than EC's sectional one). I still think Slims term thriving is a little OTT though.

DVDS, that depends what you consider a forum to be.

Slim, I've seen on here and all forums, that if certain questions are asked, then it's done via PM (or email). That makes sense, and a small forum with trusted reliable people works well for that sort of thing as it's static and can become more of a pleasant office like environment. It isn't cutting yourselves off from the online population, it's just a small private forum which works better than group emails.

A few members via invite, without general chat areas means very little moderation required (if any). Sure it's small, but it's still a forum. A while ago, someone and myself drew up a list between us of who would make the perfect racing forum from our perspective, where members input would compliment the input of others and basically be a very friendly place. We ended up with about 8 people between us from everyone we knew online, including ourselves, so 6 others (a couple I haven't seen for a while). From those 6 I would anticipate between them another 5 - 6 would be put forward, with 3 - 4 being accepted. That would be it, door closed at around a dozen max.

I have a forum which is used as an AW chat room between myself and someone else, thats as small as you can get without talking to the trees. I feel 8 - 10 members would be optimum, though it is what it is and serves it's purpose.

Grasshopper makes a valid point about being in the sweet spot. Just his sweet spot is larger than my perception of one, and I've never seen the point of guests, especially once that sweet spot is reached.
 
CPGagie said:
Luke, I can't say I've noticed a change, but to be fair, I don't look in all that often (tends to be in small waves) and never look at NH content threads (other than EC's sectional one). I still think Slims term thriving is a little OTT though.

DVDS, that depends what you consider a forum to be.

Slim, I've seen on here and all forums, that if certain questions are asked, then it's done via PM (or email). That makes sense, and a small forum with trusted reliable people works well for that sort of thing as it's static and can become more of a pleasant office like environment. It isn't cutting yourselves off from the online population, it's just a small private forum which works better than group emails.

A few members via invite, without general chat areas means very little moderation required (if any). Sure it's small, but it's still a forum. A while ago, someone and myself drew up a list between us of who would make the perfect racing forum from our perspective, where members input would compliment the input of others and basically be a very friendly place. We ended up with about 8 people between us from everyone we knew online, including ourselves, so 6 others (a couple I haven't seen for a while). From those 6 I would anticipate between them another 5 - 6 would be put forward, with 3 - 4 being accepted. That would be it, door closed at around a dozen max.

I have a forum which is used as an AW chat room between myself and someone else, thats as small as you can get without talking to the trees. I feel 8 - 10 members would be optimum, though it is what it is and serves it's purpose.

Grasshopper makes a valid point about being in the sweet spot. Just his sweet spot is larger than my perception of one, and I've never seen the point of guests, especially once that sweet spot is reached.
Click to expand...

You and your mates sound like elitist cunts. 6 people my hole.
 
Really? It would have been a work forum more than a social one. The idea was to not have too many cooks. A place where we could share our work without publishing to all, and a place where we wouldn't be calling each other cunts for having an opinion.

If you think that's elitist, thats fine, your opinion.
 
Last edited:
What you're talking about isn't really a Forum though is it, CPG. It's a special-interest, closed-shop, that just happens to use the Internet to trade ideas.
 
CPGagie said:
Really? It would have been a work forum more than a social one. The idea was to not have too many cooks. A place where we could share our work without publishing to all, and a place where we wouldn't be calling each other cunts for having an opinion.

If you think that's elitist, thats fine, your opinion.
Click to expand...

Your idea is fine but I fail to see how it has anything to do with whether this forum is 'thriving' or not. There is access to clever people in here if you seek it out. I most certainly have over the years.
 
Last edited:
Chris is basically describing an on line journal/ newspaper. There's nothing new in it, and in many respects his argument has merit. I actually think he's likely to be right at some level, if, as he says, if you're clear about what it is you're trying to achieve. It's basically an alternative model, that's all

There's always going to be a market for quality input (anyone can do the banal pithy one liner). What he's describing is a core writing team of between 6-12. They need to produce thought provoking and engaging copy however, about every other day. They also need to be able to lead informed comment on each others work that amounts to peer review

It's not massively dissimilar in concept to something like the BBC website where a journalist knocks up anything between 400-800 words and then they open the floor to carefully moderated comment

What the format requires however is four things I believe in the context of racing

1: An unswerving commitment from its contributors
2: The maintainence of a quality threshold
3: A demonstrable track record of success
4: A complementary promotional strategy to grow its readership

I think it's possibly this last point that a lot of fora were perhaps slow to repsond to as things like SEO, social media, share buttons, and paid per click started to embed themselves across cyberspace.

I also think Grasshopper has made some salient points, actually critical points would be a fairer description about staying within a tunnel. If you veer off track and allow a forum to gravitate too much in a certain direction, it becomes difficult to get it back. I tend to think quantity and quality are very important variables here. Too much, or too little of either risks blowing you into implosion
 
Last edited:
It doesn't have anything to do with this place thriving or not, Slim. I was merely alluding to a place that is thriving not always being as good as it seems, as Grasshopper pointed out with his sweet spot observation. To me a private forum with selected members is a handy thing, it is still a forum, it's just used differently to an open/social one, and appeal to me more. Whats wrong with having a bit of both Worlds?
 
But how is that any different to a Facebook group setup for say sharing betting ideas and information? People come on here for a range of different reasind and it produces all sorts of opinion which are expressed without time constraints. It's rather refreshing compared to the instananeous 140 character drivel. Members on here can each can add a piece of the jigsaw sometimes without them.knowing they are doing so.
 
SlimChance said:
Your idea is fine but I fail to see how it has anything to do with whether this forum is 'thriving' or not. There is access to clever people in here if you seek it out. I most certainly have over the years.
Click to expand...

He means me. Though he will never admit it, and hide his admiration for me with insults and put downs...
 
Back
Top